THE STATUTE AND CASE LAW DECISION YOUR UNION WILL NEVER EVER TELL YOU ABOUT
Every union member has a critically important right that their union prays the member knows nothing about. Back in 1959 a law “was enacted after lengthy congressional investigations disclosed that in many instances, union officials had run unions as private fiefdoms, in utter defiance of the interests of members….” The goal of that law, i.e., the LMRDA, was to “end ‘autocratic rule by placing the ultimate power in the hands of members, where it rightfully belongs . . .’ ” Mallick v. International Brotherhood of Electric Workers, 749 F.2d 771, 777 (D.C. Cir. 1984) (Mallick I). And one of the rights it gave each member was the right to see and audit the union’s books. There is a legal decision from the U.S. Dept. of Labor that spells this all out and how to do it. Chicago District Director, OLMS v. National Council Of Field Labor Locals, Council 73, AFGE, CASE NO: 98-SOC-1. Has your union ever told you about that right? If not, let me.
In this case the National Council of Field Labor Locals, Council 73, American Federation of Government Employees (hereinafter “Council”) violated the CSRA and 29 C.F.R. § 403.8 by its refusal to permit William Wheatley, an AFGE member, to examine all books, records, and accounts of the Council necessary to verify the Labor Organization Annual Reports (Reports) filed by the Council with the United States Department of Labor for fiscal years 1991- 1996.
The reporting provisions of Part 403 of Title 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations places a duty on the Council to permit a member for just cause to examine any books, records, and accounts necessary to verify the Labor Organization Annual Reports (LM Reports) filed by the Council with the Department of Labor pursuant to Part 403. According to the judge, “This requirement has been generally interpreted as a minimal requirement designed to prevent harassment.” He then noted that just cause has been found based on internal discrepancies in an LM Report; a sudden and unexplained change in an item on an LM Report; suspicion of possible double payments to union officials; and allegations of fraud coupled with admitted shortages in the union’s accounts.
Wheaton contended that there was just cause for such examination, including but not limited to substantial reductions in cash on hand in fiscal year 1991, expenditures in excess of income in fiscal year 1992, substantial increases in “other disbursements” in fiscal years 1993 and 1994, absence of reported investment income in fiscal years 1991-1996, expenditures for legal fees in connection with Mr. Wheatley’s request to review Respondent’s records, and possible multiple reimbursements for travel expense in fiscal year 1996.
That was all the judge needed to hear. He upheld Wheatley’s claim and ordered “William Wheatley and/or his auditors or attorneys be entitled to examine any books, records, and accounts of the Council necessary to verify its LM Reports for fiscal years 1991 through and including 1996; and Respondent reimburse Complainant for the costs of this action.’
WOW! OUCH! & HOLY COW! I will bet that there are hundreds of union members out there that have complained about how hard it is to get information out of their union or to figure out what is really happening with the money. Sure they get to see the annual LM-2 and IRS 990 online, but there is so much more that goes on that is never reported on those forms. This case gives every member enormous power to demand real answers to their questions because the alternative for the union is very sserious.
