Local President and 2 Officers of Local 400 are retired

[xfacter400]

Local 400future, you must be one of those that voted for this shit to take place! Its clear you really do not have a grasp of the UAW's policy against self enrichment, the constitution or right from wrong.

 

Where were you when the vote took place, on tony's lap? For that matter, why don't you let us in on the vote tally so we can all let the E board members know how we feel? Who voted for the destruction of Local 400 and who didn't? di any of you vote against it? Did you all follow blindly?

your right he has nooooooooooooo idea he tells you what he thinks and not whats right.HIM an tony p will get allong just fine

[400member]

Following is a copy of the appeal that was at the plant,

 

I read this thing and it really spells it out. What is this local400future even thinking about not relevant???

[local400future]

The only thing that was voted on was if anyone had a problem with the 50 hours pay being passed on to the VP. I was the only one who questioned this and I didn't think the company would go for it. Ultimately everyone voted yes because this did not impact local finances at all.

 

What you two, xfactor and member, need to be questioning your eboard officers on is who voted yes on the golf outing and the t-shirts over the phone AFTER the eboard voted "no" on any extra spending.

 

Lastly, if you two have a problem with me, why don't you actually talk to me instead a trolling the internet stirring up shit?

[local400future]

you made a statement "we don't need fulltime time officers down at the local" but yet you support tony p double dipping.

 

eb members

 

 

* Fred Gilliam....he is out numbered

 

* Franco Canale......needs to take tony p dick out of his mouth

 

* Theresa M. Felt

 

* Al Coscia......what can i say sell out

 

 

* Brad Tiseo..... last names says it alll gooo tony p

 

* Chris McFarlane ..........wow send him to black lake,nevers shows up for meetings

 

 

* Luigi Franzese............when franco done sucking his there to swallow

 

 

* Paulette Mendelson.......

 

 

* Steve Tolomei.........

 

 

* John M. Cantin............

 

 

* David Bogdanski.............hi dave

 

Gotta love the cowards that have been born thanks to the internet. I've told Tony to his face I didn't think he was a good president, yet you can only anonymously insult me. Are you afraid of me, or are you just a chickenshit in general?

[laidofflocal400member]

The only thing that was voted on was if anyone had a problem with the 50 hours pay being passed on to the VP. I was the only one who questioned this and I didn't think the company would go for it. Ultimately everyone voted yes because this did not impact local finances at all.

 

What you two, xfactor and member, need to be questioning your eboard officers on is who voted yes on the golf outing and the t-shirts over the phone AFTER the eboard voted "no" on any extra spending.

 

Lastly, if you two have a problem with me, why don't you actually talk to me instead a trolling the internet stirring up shit?

 

Dear Mr. Know it all,

The Eboard does not have authority to vote on passing Tony's 50 hours pay to the vice president, that is a contractual thing. Ford Motor is obligated by contract to pay the President and only the president, now why doesn't the eboard vote to get us our Cost of Living money back, I mean you guys think you can change the contract anyway you want. YOU DON'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO THAT PERIOD!

And if Tony P told you guys that you do, then I have some property I'll sell you real CHEAP!

[400member]

Dear Mr. Know it all,

The Eboard does not have authority to vote on passing Tony's 50 hours pay to the vice president, that is a contractual thing. Ford Motor is obligated by contract to pay the President and only the president, now why doesn't the eboard vote to get us our Cost of Living money back, I mean you guys think you can change the contract anyway you want. YOU DON'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO THAT PERIOD!

And if Tony P told you guys that you do, then I have some property I'll sell you real CHEAP!

 

Yeah your right laidoff, Local400future should be able to get the GEN back and first tier wages for new hires... maybe tony, howard and gajeski can pitch in a few bucks to help us (members not officers) out. Isn't that what they are supposed to do anyway!!

 

 

[400member]

Even if it weren't legally wrong, it's still ethically wrong. The took the buyout yet continue to make the same wages. Hell, don't we all wish we could do that?

 

IMO, Lenny's mistake was to continue with the whole missappropriation of local funds with no proof. The IUAW may have used that to throw the whole thing out. Bearing false witness is a crime.

 

Aside from that, it was very informative and members of the "E" board have been discussing this, but it is not something that will happen overnight.

 

Al nothing was said wrong there actually xfactor400 was very nice... let's see when you had the chance to run for prez what did you do? When you had the chance to testify on the charges that were brought against the election what did you do? Being elected to E board by the membership what have you done, TO ADVANCE THE MEMBERSHIP?

 

You have the ability and some would say the responsibility, to go to the DOL thrusday to report all of this stuff. You can take the informtion to the Intl Union tomorrow, if you want to. You can give the information to this lenny guy, who actually filed appeals with Intl and the Local, tommorrow or tonight.

 

What you do, is someting you have to live with under the honor code of your USN and your kids who you mentioned many times in your letters and your website. Stand for something, or you fall for anything.

 

 

 

[local400future]

Al nothing was said wrong there actually xfactor400 was very nice... let's see when you had the chance to run for prez what did you do? When you had the chance to testify on the charges that were brought against the election what did you do? Being elected to E board by the membership what have you done, TO ADVANCE THE MEMBERSHIP?

 

You have the ability and some would say the responsibility, to go to the DOL thrusday to report all of this stuff. You can take the informtion to the Intl Union tomorrow, if you want to. You can give the information to this lenny guy, who actually filed appeals with Intl and the Local, tommorrow or tonight.

 

What you do, is someting you have to live with under the honor code of your USN and your kids who you mentioned many times in your letters and your website. Stand for something, or you fall for anything.

 

 

 

 

The reason they had the election again was because of what I told the DOL. I cooperated fully with them, all I did was take my name off the petition and drop out of the election. I felt that it would make no difference and it didn't. There are other ways to make changes to the local besides protesting the election over and over just to get the same results.

 

You people seem to think that if you bitch enough you'll get what you think is right, yet none of you put your name out there. As much as I dislike Lenny and Sam, at least they stuck there necks out, regardless of their motivations. I put a bullseye on my back every time I post here from you guys and the Tony and company, so don't presume to lecture me. Lastly, don't talk to me about honor if you can't even post your name.

[400member]

The reason they had the election again was because of what I told the DOL. I cooperated fully with them, all I did was take my name off the petition and drop out of the election. I felt that it would make no difference and it didn't. There are other ways to make changes to the local besides protesting the election over and over just to get the same results.

 

You people seem to think that if you bitch enough you'll get what you think is right, yet none of you put your name out there. As much as I dislike Lenny and Sam, at least they stuck there necks out, regardless of their motivations. I put a bullseye on my back every time I post here from you guys and the Tony and company, so don't presume to lecture me. Lastly, don't talk to me about honor if you can't even post your name.

 

 

[*]"]

 

Al,

 

First of all I wasn't the one publishing my honor code from my time in the USN and that I was doing this for the membership, that was you.

 

Secondly, the DOL did rely partly on your statemnt that came as a result of the election protest that you took your name off of after toney had something for you.

 

Thirdly, If you didn't think it would make a differnce, why did you and Randy run?

 

Forth, protesting/appealing/charging are the vehicles in the UAW constitution to be used by all members who percieve or see a wrong being done to the membership. you could use these.

 

Fifth, you seem to think that lenny and Sam have questionalbe motivations, while you don't or didn't questioin the retirement of the officers and movement of the 50 hours pay to the VP. So your high and mighty is liost here.

 

Sixth, I didn't speak about my honor, it is yours that is in question. My name is unimportant, however the posts here are correct to the UAW constitution. These are things that I have experience in and about over allot of years.

 

Do the right thing, that is all you can be expected to do.

[xfacter400]

The only thing that was voted on was if anyone had a problem with the 50 hours pay being passed on to the VP. I was the only one who questioned this and I didn't think the company would go for it. Ultimately everyone voted yes because this did not impact local finances at all.

 

What you two, xfactor and member, need to be questioning your eboard officers on is who voted yes on the golf outing and the t-shirts over the phone AFTER the eboard voted "no" on any extra spending.

 

Lastly, if you two have a problem with me, why don't you actually talk to me instead a trolling the internet stirring up shit?

FIRST "The only thing that was voted on was if anyone had a problem with the 50 hours pay being passed on to the VP"THIS IS WRONG READ YOUR BYLAWS AL HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO MAKE YOU LOOK LIKE A FUCKING ASS.ARTICLE X111 SECTION 4 OF YOUR BY LAWS STATEIN THE CASE OF A VACANCY IN THE OFFICE OF PRESIDENT,THE VICE PRESIDENT SHALL FILL THE VACANCY FOR THE UNEXPIRED TERM. TONYP RETIRED HE SHOULD BE FUCKING GONE,THE VP TAKES OVER WE DO NOT REPLACE THE VP SPOT THE LOCAL SAVES MONEY.

 

"because this did not impact local finances at all" YES IT DOES WE SHOULD NOT HAVE HAD A VP SPOT TO BEGIN WITH. TONY P SAID IT WOULD BE PART TIME BUT OF CORSE BECAME FULL TIME. HE CUT A DEAL NOT TO CUT TIESO AND THE MEMBERSHIP IS PAYING FOR IT.WHEN UTICA CLOSED JUNE 1 THE LOCAL WAS SUPPOSE TO CUT AN OFFICER (THE VP) IS THE FIRST TO GO AGIN AGIN WHY TO THE RULES APPLY ONLY TO SOME AN NOT ALL ...HELLL ROMEO CUT SAMBANI ON 3 RD SHIFT BECUSE OF NUMBERS, THEY TLO BOTH DAYSHIFT COMMITTIE MEN WHEN THERE SHIFT WAS STILL RUNNING BASED ON NUMBERS..AN THE LOCAL IS NOT AFFECTED.

Edited September 17, 2009 by xfacter400

[xfacter400]

FIRST "The only thing that was voted on was if anyone had a problem with the 50 hours pay being passed on to the VP"THIS IS WRONG READ YOUR BYLAWS AL HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO MAKE YOU LOOK LIKE A FUCKING ASS.ARTICLE X111 SECTION 4 OF YOUR BY LAWS STATEIN THE CASE OF A VACANCY IN THE OFFICE OF PRESIDENT,THE VICE PRESIDENT SHALL FILL THE VACANCY FOR THE UNEXPIRED TERM. TONYP RETIRED HE SHOULD BE FUCKING GONE,THE VP TAKES OVER WE DO NOT REPLACE THE VP SPOT THE LOCAL SAVES MONEY.

 

"because this did not impact local finances at all" YES IT DOES WE SHOULD NOT HAVE HAD A VP SPOT TO BEGIN WITH. TONY P SAID IT WOULD BE PART TIME BUT OF CORSE BECAME FULL TIME. HE CUT A DEAL NOT TO CUT TIESO AND THE MEMBERSHIP IS PAYING FOR IT.WHEN UTICA CLOSED JUNE 1 THE LOCAL WAS SUPPOSE TO CUT AN OFFICER (THE VP) IS THE FIRST TO GO AGIN AGIN WHY TO THE RULES APPLY ONLY TO SOME AN NOT ALL ...HELLLROMEO CUT SAMBANI ON 3 RD SHIFT BECUSE OF NUMBERS, THEY TLO BOTH DAYSHIFT COMMITTIE MEN WHEN THERE SHIFT WAS STILL RUNNING

THE PROBLEM I HAVE IS YOU TALK OUT OF YOUR ASS YOU OVER AN OVER RUN YOUR MOUTH ABOUT THIS AN THAT YOU MAKE NOOOO VALID POINTS I TELL YOU HOW YOUR WRONG AND TELL YOU WERE TO READ IT FOR YOURSELF AND YOU STILLL THINK YOUR RIGHT ... UUUUUUUUUUUUU ARE NO BETTER THE PHONY.WHENN YOU COME AT ME DON'T BRING YOUR WEAK ASS SHIT..U KNOWING WHO I AM WOULD NOT MATTER

[xfacter400]

The only thing that was voted on was if anyone had a problem with the 50 hours pay being passed on to the VP. I was the only one who questioned this and I didn't think the company would go for it. Ultimately everyone voted yes because this did not impact local finances at all.

 

What you two, xfactor and member, need to be questioning your eboard officers on is who voted yes on the golf outing and the t-shirts over the phone AFTER the eboard voted "no" on any extra spending.

 

Lastly, if you two have a problem with me, why don't you actually talk to me instead a trolling the internet stirring up shit?

NOT STIRRING UP SHIT AL GIVING U THE FACTS ....HEY DID YOU HEAR THAT, IT WAS THE BELL ,CLASS IN SESSION. NOW GRAB YOUR CONTRACT BOOK OUT OF PHONY ASS MOVE FRONCO HEAD OUT OF THE WAY FIRST...GET YOUR PENCIL AN START WRIGHTING DOWN THE PAGE NUMBERS I KEEP GIVING YOU OVER AN OVER AN QUESTION THIS SHIT.

Edited September 17, 2009 by xfacter400

[400member]

The only thing that was voted on was if anyone had a problem with the 50 hours pay being passed on to the VP. I was the only one who questioned this and I didn't think the company would go for it. Ultimately everyone voted yes because this did not impact local finances at all.

 

What you two, xfactor and member, need to be questioning your eboard officers on is who voted yes on the golf outing and the t-shirts over the phone AFTER the eboard voted "no" on any extra spending.

 

Lastly, if you two have a problem with me, why don't you actually talk to me instead a trolling the internet stirring up shit?

 

local400future, this is all good information. but did the eboard really believe that our local union could rewrite the national agreement, to suit one individual? I mean, what were the ford chairmen saying when all this took place. Newsome and tolliver had to have input, were they for it or against it? did they speak on it or were they silent? Maybe your not the one members should be hitting so hard here. Tell us the whole story behond this.

 

What was the information tony presented to the e board? did he have names from Intl for the eborad? Did he have names from Ford HR at HQ for the eboard?

 

As for the phone call for additional expednitures, after the eboard voted against unnecessary expenditures,, isn't there a bylaw that requires a quorum for meetings in our local, and isn't there a constitutional cite that also requires quorums for meetings? Shouldn'tt that been a red flag about the operating procedures of the local adminstration? Couldn't someone take this info to the Intl?

 

And lastly, wasn't ther a recent audit being performed at local 400 by the Intl Union? The audit should have been about operating preactices as well as the numbers and couldn't concerned elected members spoke up to the auditors, or at least left anonomous message of something fishy gong on??? Couldnt someone have let the membership kow that these kinds of tings were takng pplace? Can't someone take thhis information to the auditor now?

 

I don't have a problem with you Al, its the operating practices of the Local administration that you became part of as an elkected sworn member of the e board. Its tony and others who are destroying the UAW from within. Its tony and guys like him that take and take and take leaving a shell of a once great local. Its the way local 400 is heading for bankruptcy or worse from the actions of toiny, howard, gajeski, and others who could do something, but will not for one reason or another, so don't take it personal, it isn't, its just business. At least for me.

[local400future]

You can say FACT all you want, but show me in writing were it states that a retiree CANNOT hold an executive officer position. It's not covered in the local bylaws and all the articles you refer to in the constitution do not state this either.

 

I'm not disagreeing with you guys, but righteous indignation does not mean any laws or rules were broken. The system itself is broken and needs to be fixed and that ain't going to happen over night: whatever facts, documentation, whatever you guys can produce would definitely help. As of now, regardless of what anyone thinks, what they are doing is perfectly legal according to everything I have read INCLUDING what you guys sited so far. Your interpretation doesn't mean crap if the people enforcing the rules disagree. Therefore we need to change the system from the bottom up, but being antagonistic just makes you look like radicals.

 

WE as the membership need to fix this. I am not defending anyone and you guys should be happy that one of the "E" board members actually listens. Xfactor if you are serious, stop with the insults and work with me.

 

Step up like I did, or do whatever you can to help me help us.

Edited September 17, 2009 by local400future

[400member]

You can say FACT all you want, but show me in writing were it states that a retiree CANNOT hold an executive officer position. It's not covered in the local bylaws and all the articles you refer to in the constitution do not state this either.

 

I'm not disagreeing with you guys, but righteous indignation does not mean any laws or rules were broken. The system itself is broken and needs to be fixed and that ain't going to happen over night: whatever facts, documentation, whatever you guys can produce would definitely help. As of now, regardless of what anyone thinks, what they are doing is perfectly legal according to everything I have read INCLUDING what you guys sited so far. Your interpretation doesn't mean crap if the people enforcing the rules disagree. Therefore we need to change the system from the bottom up, but being antagonistic just makes you look like radicals.

 

WE as the membership need to fix this. I am not defending anyone and you guys should be happy that one of the "E" board members actually listens. Xfactor if you are serious, stop with the insults and work with me.

 

Step up like I did, or do whatever you can to help me help us.

 

Read the appeal. it has all the cites and applicatioins in it. it even has he applications done by the Intl UAW through the UAW PRB decisions. Go on the PRB website and look up some of he cases. Read the entire constitutional cite andthe interpreatation in the rear of the book or go online to read it at uaw.org. the bylaws come into pplay here they state (in part), it is in the appeal, the exec officers upon request or at their own decision will take part in negoiations. furthermore, the PrB has statd, the president cannot delegate her/his duties without be delelict of those constitutional duties.

[xfacter400]

You can say FACT all you want, but show me in writing were it states that a retiree CANNOT hold an executive officer position. It's not covered in the local bylaws and all the articles you refer to in the constitution do not state this either.

 

I'm not disagreeing with you guys, but righteous indignation does not mean any laws or rules were broken. The system itself is broken and needs to be fixed and that ain't going to happen over night: whatever facts, documentation, whatever you guys can produce would definitely help. As of now, regardless of what anyone thinks, what they are doing is perfectly legal according to everything I have read INCLUDING what you guys sited so far. Your interpretation doesn't mean crap if the people enforcing the rules disagree. Therefore we need to change the system from the bottom up, but being antagonistic just makes you look like radicals.

 

WE as the membership need to fix this. I am not defending anyone and you guys should be happy that one of the "E" board members actually listens. Xfactor if you are serious, stop with the insults and work with me.

 

Step up like I did, or do whatever you can to help me help us.

uaw constitution article 6 membership section 19 number 3 it says that he CANNOT HOLD OFFICE AS A RETIREEE

Edited September 17, 2009 by xfacter400

[local400future]

uaw constitution article 6 membership section 19 number 3 it says that he CANNOT HOLD OFFICE AS A RETIREEE

 

Section 19. Any member in good standing who is retired, shall be entitled to a "retired membership status" which, without being required to pay membership dues during the period of such retirement, shall entitle her/him to all of the privileges of membership except the right to vote in elections conducted pursuant to Article 19, Section 3; Article 45, Section 2; and Article 50, Sections 1 and 5. Appropriate cards denoting such membership status shall be prepared by the International Union and furnished to Local Unions upon request and at cost. The regular withdrawal-transfer provisions of this Constitution shall be applicable if such retired member returns to active employment.

 

Unless the hard copy says something different than the online copy at uaw.org... If you can find it, cut and paste it. I'll get ahold of a hard copy and look it up.

 

Member, I checked all of his references and nothing specifically states that retirees cannot hold office, but they could be interpretted that way. We know how interpretations go.

[400member]

uaw constitution article 6 membership section 19 number 3 it says that he CANNOT HOLD OFFICE AS A RETIREEE

 

Below found at http://uaw.org/constitution/article06.cfm

Article 6, Section 19.

 

Any member in good standing who is retired, shall be entitled to a "retired membership status" which, without being required to pay membership dues during the period of such retirement, shall entitle her/him to all of the privileges of membership except the right to vote in elections conducted pursuant to Article 19, Section 3; Article 45, Section 2; and Article 50, Sections 1 and 5. Appropriate cards denoting such membership status shall be prepared by the International Union and furnished to Local Unions upon request and at cost. The regular withdrawal-transfer provisions of this Constitution shall be applicable if such retired member returns to active employment.

 

Interptreatation, Article 6, SECTION 19 http://uaw.org/constitution/interp.cfm

 

(1) Voting Rights of Retired Members in Local Unions

 

A retired member has a constitutional right to participate in any and all elections conducted on a local-wide basis except elections of the type specifically exempted under this Section. Under this Section a retired member would not, however, be eligible to vote for a Steward or Committeeperson even though that Steward or Committee person might, by virtue of her/his election, also hold office as a member of a Local Union policy making group such as the Executive Board. (Detroit, 1/21/60, Page 172.)

 

(2) Voting Rights of Retired Members in Units of Amalgamated Local Unions

 

Retired members are eligible to vote for officers of units as such. If a unit has a substantial complement of officers set up by its bylaws, and these officers generally correspond to the Executive Officers of a Local Union as set forth in Article 38, Section 1, the retired member would be eligible to vote for such officers even though these officers also constitute the Local Union Bargaining/Negotiating Committee. In units where the bylaws do not provide for a substantial complement of officers, the retired member would not be entitled to vote for such unit Chair and Secretary since the primary function of these individuals is to serve as officials of the Bargaining/Negotiating Committee and they are only incidentally charged with the responsibilities of unit officers. (Detroit, 1/21/60)

 

(3) Eligibility of Retired Members to Run for Local Union Offices

 

Retired members are ineligible to run for any local union position which carries responsibility for grievances or bargaining required by the Collective Bargaining Agreement(s) and/or local union bylaws. (Las Vegas, 6/1/02).

 

http://www.uawpublicreviewboard.org/ for the PRB decision and the office phone number you can call to get the information. Talk to Pam Klingbeil.

 

 

 

[local400future]

 

(3) Eligibility of Retired Members to Run for Local Union Offices

 

Retired members are ineligible to run for any local union position which carries responsibility for grievances or bargaining required by the Collective Bargaining Agreement(s) and/or local union bylaws. (Las Vegas, 6/1/02).

 

http://www.uawpublicreviewboard.org/ for the PRB decision and the office phone number you can call to get the information. Talk to Pam Klingbeil.

 

 

 

 

And that's the loophole. They can't run, but nothing states that they cannot continue to serve if they retire during their current term. We need to fix that.

[TheEagle]

And that's the loophole. They can't run, but nothing states that they cannot continue to serve if they retire during their current term. We need to fix that.

 

 

Thats the same shit we thought too.. Until we found out they can still run for Financial Secretary or Recording Secretary...We know very well..CalClark ran as a retiree and won last election...be carefule what you ask for...we made a huge mistake!!

[400member]

Thats the same shit we thought too.. Until we found out they can still run for Financial Secretary or Recording Secretary...We know very well..CalClark ran as a retiree and won last election...be carefule what you ask for...we made a huge mistake!!

 

http://www.uawpublicreviewboard.org/cases/case1499.pdf For example, in Hawkins v. Local Union 7, UAW, PRB Case No. 1283,

(January 28, 2000), we considered President Yokich’s ruling that retired members are

not eligible to run for President of local unions participating in the UAW/DaimlerChrysler

National Agreement because a local union President has responsibilities under that

Agreement for dealing with grievance and bargaining matters. We found that the

language of Article 6, §19, by excluding retirees from elections conducted pursuant to

Article 19, §3; Article 45, §2; and Article 50, §§1 and 2, evinced the Constitutional

framers’ intent to exclude retirees as a class from participation in all aspects of the

collective bargaining and contract administration processes.28 In Bennett v. Local Union

1853, UAW, PRB Case No. 1429, (April 22, 2003), we applied this rule to affirm the

ineligibility of a retiree to run for the office of President of Local 1853, despite appellant’s

claim that the President of that Local had no bargaining responsibilities, because the

28 PRB Case No. 1283, at p. 5.

PRB CASE NO. 1499 Page 10.

Local Union Bylaws named the President as a member of the Bargaining Committee. In

this case, Local 600’s Bylaws assign specific bargaining and grievance handling

responsibilities to the Financial Secretary-Treasurer. The position is therefore one

which may not be held by retired members under the International Constitution. In addition the Local 400 bylaws state in Art VII Sec 2 The president, vice-president, recording secretary, financial-secretary treasurer and such local representative as may be elected or appointed by the local union, shall carry out their duties as defined in the International constitution and as may be assigned by the Local union. In addition, the president, and/or executive officers, shall assist in negotiations when requested or when he/she deems it necessary. The recording secretary shall be required to post proper notices as described in Article XIII, section 3, paragraph (e). (emphasis added)

 

This is all found in the appeal posted earlier. The UAW say cannot run or hold (held) office involved in bergaining. The president clearly cannot be exempt as those are constitutional duties. At local 400, the Bylaws cclearstate they are involve and cannot be exempt by personal choice as thye would be derilict of there duties. Cal Clark situation dependss on you bylaws.

 

Here at Local 400 it is clear that our executive officers cannot run for, or hold office if retired. "The position is therefore one

which may not be held by retired members under the International Constitution."

 

Local400future, it isall in the appeal posted above, you just have to read it and then look at your bylaws, the cases adn the constitution.

 

 

[buster6969]

http://www.uawpublicreviewboard.org/cases/case1499.pdf For example, in Hawkins v. Local Union 7, UAW, PRB Case No. 1283,

(January 28, 2000), we considered President Yokich’s ruling that retired members are

not eligible to run for President of local unions participating in the UAW/DaimlerChrysler

National Agreement because a local union President has responsibilities under that

Agreement for dealing with grievance and bargaining matters. We found that the

language of Article 6, §19, by excluding retirees from elections conducted pursuant to

Article 19, §3; Article 45, §2; and Article 50, §§1 and 2, evinced the Constitutional

framers’ intent to exclude retirees as a class from participation in all aspects of the

collective bargaining and contract administration processes.28 In Bennett v. Local Union

1853, UAW, PRB Case No. 1429, (April 22, 2003), we applied this rule to affirm the

ineligibility of a retiree to run for the office of President of Local 1853, despite appellant’s

claim that the President of that Local had no bargaining responsibilities, because the

28 PRB Case No. 1283, at p. 5.

PRB CASE NO. 1499 Page 10.

Local Union Bylaws named the President as a member of the Bargaining Committee. In

this case, Local 600’s Bylaws assign specific bargaining and grievance handling

responsibilities to the Financial Secretary-Treasurer. The position is therefore one

which may not be held by retired members under the International Constitution. In addition the Local 400 bylaws state in Art VII Sec 2 The president, vice-president, recording secretary, financial-secretary treasurer and such local representative as may be elected or appointed by the local union, shall carry out their duties as defined in the International constitution and as may be assigned by the Local union. In addition, the president, and/or executive officers, shall assist in negotiations when requested or when he/she deems it necessary. The recording secretary shall be required to post proper notices as described in Article XIII, section 3, paragraph (e). (emphasis added)

 

This is all found in the appeal posted earlier. The UAW say cannot run or hold (held) office involved in bergaining. The president clearly cannot be exempt as those are constitutional duties. At local 400, the Bylaws cclearstate they are involve and cannot be exempt by personal choice as thye would be derilict of there duties. Cal Clark situation dependss on you bylaws.

 

Here at Local 400 it is clear that our executive officers cannot run for, or hold office if retired. "The position is therefore one

which may not be held by retired members under the International Constitution."

 

Local400future, it isall in the appeal posted above, you just have to read it and then look at your bylaws, the cases adn the constitution.

 

 

LOL....dude, there are currently 2 retired presidents that recently got elected to their 2nd term being retired. Monroe Stamping and Ypsi!! What makes 400 so special?

[400member]

And that's the loophole. They can't run, but nothing states that they cannot continue to serve if they retire during their current term. We need to fix that.

 

There is no loophole!! Local 400 bylaws require officers to bargain, Intl Constitution says if bylaws require bargaining yu cannot run or hold office. You gotta be able to read...!! Get you bylaws, which were just updated Oct 2008, your constitution (print or online versions), your online computer for the PRB cases and then sit down and Read the appeal all the way through. I assume, perhaps wrongly, that you can read and refer to source material while doing that.

 

The appeal says that the past two Intl administrations (Yokich and Gettelfinger) have taken the same position as the appeal. the PRB has affirmed all of those opinioins. That is about 10+ years of history on this issue. The nexus in this situation is the byaws, only as it is related to financial and rec sec. The president cannot at any time be retired,

 

As for "fixing it," just call the Intl, DOL, or other e board members and have them removed. Have the retired officers pay back to the local all the funds taken under false pretexts as the appeal states, from 2006. ( Eagle, you can do this to if the circumstances dictate.)

 

Now whether or not 400 officers misrepresented information to the eboard may determine the depth of culpability of others involved and any other issues that arise out of this.

 

As for Cal Clark, Eagle, I cannot say since I don't have all the info. But you guys should be able to move him out if he has any responsibility of bargaining. You have a framework with lenny's appeal posted above, I am sure he won't mind if you use it. In fact, I don't think he would mind if members across the country used it, his contact info is on the appeal.

[400member]

LOL....dude, there are currently 2 retired presidents that recently got elected to their 2nd term being retired. Monroe Stamping and Ypsi!! What makes 400 so special?

 

Dude, maybe the at MOnroe and Ypsi, the memberships aren't aware. maybe the membership isn't educated in the UAW constitution, the PRB cases, and etc. It isn't like all this infromation is given to you. Members usually have to go digging for information. When was the last time you had info delivered to you? Other than elected or appointed reps, who get special books in special form, like the unpulished letters and parts of the contract, or Administrative letters that talk about these kinds of issues, who gets this info? When is the last time your local had classes about this stuff? You know about mushrooms right, they are kept in the dark and coverd with shit... Well that is what the Intl and locals like to do... You can choose to be a mushroom, or not!!

 

The UAW like us to think they are open, but they really make it hard to get info, especially when the electronic formats are so easily distributed online. Did you ever look at the amount of personnel and dollars we spend on the public relations, research and publications department in our Union? Millions!! Read the Intl LM-2 document from the USDOL. If a person is computer literate, the infromation is out there and I believe with a little direction, a person can have much of this info in their hot little hands in about a week, being on the computer about three hours a day.

 

After that, it is all about putting it all into practice. Of course the UAW doesn't tell you this, because it would require them to pass on some of the deals with the company, be involved deeply with the USDOL and DOJ, and require them to perform their jobs like you and other members. If this info was out ther in the 90's, the UAW might be a different animal now....

 

As for the contract, is can't be printing costs stopping them from distributing it, cuz the company pays for that. And that is all in electronic format, searchable and out there for some people. Just like the Umpire decisoins from the arbitration department.

 

Dude, how important is it to you??? Ultimatley it is up to members to act, then demand better from all parties concerned. Again, Dude, how important is it to you?

 

[400member]

LOL....dude, there are currently 2 retired presidents that recently got elected to their 2nd term being retired. Monroe Stamping and Ypsi!! What makes 400 so special?

 

By the way Dude, how did you come to find out there are other retired presidents?? Is there a list? Is there a special book somewhere that you have access to? Are you in those locals? I mean if there is a source that has this kind of info, I for one would certainly like to know how to get it. I am sure the rest of the members across this country would like it too!!

 

Post the source Dude!! Let us all have access, just like I posted the PRB, stuff. Dude, don't hold out on us.

 

400 isn't so special, we just have members looking out.