WHAT SHOULD A UNION’S INTERNAL DISCIPLINE PROCESS LOOK LIKE?

Union leaders as well as members are equally capable of violating the law, regulation or even their own union constitution. Consequently, all unions have a process outlined in their constitution and bylaws for filing a charge against a member or leader. The law specifies that the process must provide for the accused to be served written specific charges, a reasonable time to prepare A defense, and a full and fair hearing. But there are a half-dozen other issues union leaders, from the local to the national, should focus on. First, …

does your union constitution treat members and leaders alike?  For example, does it provide that members can be found guilty of charges based on a majority vote, but chapter, regional or national leaders require a 2/3’s vote to convict? Although we cannot find any case law stating that is illegal, federal statute does require that all members “receive fair and equal treatment under the governing rules of the organization.” It hardly sounds fair to us that elected officials are harder to convict than members.

Second, who can file charges against someone in the union? Here again, one should look at whether members and elected officials are treated equally.  For example, can anyone file a charge against a member, but charges against officers can only be filed by a limited group of people?  Are all officers, e.g. local, regional, and national, vulnerable to charges from any member?  If not, why not?

Third, do charges lead directly to a hearing and discipline if the charged person is found guilty?  If not, why not? For example, if a simple member is charged, does the hearing directly result in discipline or must there be another process beyond a hearing finding a member guilty to impose discipline? Is the process the same for officers? If so, why the extra protection for that officer?

Fourth, if a member of a local is tried at a local union meeting at which any member can attend why are not the charges and trial of an officer at EVERY level of the organization at least as open, e.g., charges are made available to all members under that officer’s jurisdiction and the trial or hearing is just as open to all members—or at least their local elected representatives? ZOOM and similar apps make live events easily viewable.

Fifth, are your union’s constitutional rules clear as to how a trial or hearing is called?  For example, if a local member files charges against the head of a regional council of locals what guarantees that those charges will be processed swiftly?  Absent some specific language, the council head could sit on them until the next meeting of the council, e.g., in 6 or 12 months. A member would not have the same kind of control as an elected officer, especially the top officer of a local, council or national union, has.

Sixth, in my experience, when a local union charges and tries a member, guilt or innocence is determined by a showing of hands of all the members in attendance. Everyone there can see how everyone else votes. Even where the votes are limited to only the members of the local’s executive board those votes are also cast by a show of hands in the open meeting. But are those the rules throughout the organization?  When a regional or national official is charged, can all the members see how each voter other voted?  This would be especially important where voting is limited to only the executive board members of the union entity or a trial committee.  They are the members’ representatives and owe the members they represent openness and accountability.