The Real UTU

Railway Organizing: How Labor Law Reform Helps Us

2009-04-01T21:27:00.002-04:00

The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) presents a challenge to private sector workers who try to organize and collectively bargain. Yet we are subject to an entirely different set of rules and regulations for organizing. The Railway Labor Act (RLA) makes it even harder for workers trying to form a union even more difficult than for workers covered by the NLRA.

The RLA requires that in order to form a union, there must be support from a majority among all eligible company employees—not just those who turnout to vote. This requirement is a higher threshold than the NLRA—and even general U.S. election law—both of which require majority support from only those who actually vote in an election. Imagine if in order to win the presidency, Barack Obama or John McCain needed the votes of a majority of all eligible American citizens rather than just voters or those voting that day.

The Railway Labor Act requires that a majority of a company's employees at ALL company locations must vote for the union—not just those at any one location. This requires workers to reach out across the country if they are covered by a nationwide company.

The only way to expand our reach in trhe rail industry, especiually among short line rails, is by reforming labor law. We do not have the support yet, however, by passing the Employee Free Choice Act and by instituting legislation like universal health care, the stepping stone will be there to finally bring some true labor law reform to our industry.

Another Unit Raided By the BLET

2009-03-29T20:54:00.003-04:00

This came in from the comments section:

It has been officially announced by the National Mediation Board in Washington DC that UTU has once again lost another representation election.

The campaign on a railroad property called ICE involved 300 railroad workers who decided enough with the Futhey regime. The vote ended with 186 in favor of the BLET 80 for the UTU.
According to the BLET, the theme of the campaign was that the UTU is broke and divided.

This extensive campaign by the UTU was led by several of Futhey's friends and supporters. Good news is that one of Futhey's appointees maintained his best score for video golf at the Bettendorf Holiday Inn.

We Are ALL Under Attack

2009-03-12T00:13:00.003-04:00

It does not matter where you stand in the battle for the future of our union, because while our union may have its internal differences, we are all under attack from our mutual enemies.

Yesterday, the Employee Free Choice Act was introduced. While the bill will level the playing field for workers by removing the barriers to organizing for millions of Americans, corporate America, the beltway pundits, and lobbyists are doing everything to stop the legislation in its tracks.

We at the Real UTU urge everyone, no matter who you are, to write your Senators and Congressmen about this bill. Let them know who it is that made the Democratic Party what it is and who stood by them through the good and the bad. Now, more than ever America needs a strong labor movement, especially during these economic rough times.

While we fight for the future of our union, we cannot let the attacks of those whose intend to destroy us go unchallenged.

An Injury To One Is Not Their Problem

2009-03-06T20:55:00.003-05:00

The people at "Sink Our Union" have been so obsessed with carrying water for their King, Mike Futhey, that they seem to have forgotten the big picture.

Visiting their site is like a visit into the twilight zone, where current events and economic realities we as union members face take a back seat. Instead, we're treated to an "Alice In Wonderland" World where overturning the voting intent of thousands of UTU members seems to be an obsession that overcomes all else.

Try to find talk about the recession and its effect on rail workers. Maybe you can try to dig up even just the slightest bit of discussion about the Employee Free Choice Act. Try it and you'll come up with nothing. Two months ago, when the labor movement, in particular the UAW, was under attack by conservative right wing Republicans, not a word in defense of our brothers and sisters in the auto industry was mentioned.

No, instead the discussion on that site is completely dominated by the whims of the four BLET plaintiffs and the dictates of their king, Mike Futhey.

Of course, being BLET members who were in leadership positions within their union, it comes as no surprise these same people remain the sole backers of people like Dan Boren (D-OK) from within the labor movement. In case you're wondering, Dan Boren, a Democrat from Oklahoma, has been a vocal opponent of organized labor and even took to the stage today at a Chamber of Commerce meeting to blast the labor movement.

Who among his top backers is the only union to support him? You guessed it. The BLET.

The same union the UTU plaintiffs come from and want to merge us into.

Talk about being a group of out of touch, "useful idiots."

Maybe, we are being too hard on them. Maybe, when it comes to the brand of unionism practiced by the BLET plaintiffs, the long cherish labor value of "an "injury to one, is an inury to all" doesn't really seem to matter.

Major Victory: Sixth Circuit to Review Merger Injunction

2009-02-25T20:37:00.001-05:00

The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals has agreed to hear arguments on April 21 in an appeal of the preliminary injunction halting implementation of the merger between the UTU and the SMWIA.
The preliminary injunction was issued last June by Judge John R. Adams, a Bush appointee, who ruled that the merger could not be implemented pending conclusion of the case, including any appeals that might be accepted by any higher courts.

At issue is whether Judge Adams erred in siding with the UTU/BLET plaintiffs who joined forces with then UTU Vice President Futhey to block the merger.

While no charges have been filed against the UTU/BLET members or their co-conspirators for suing the UTU, 7 UTU Vice Presidents who intervened in support of the merger were charged with dual unionism and face a trial before the UTU Executive Board. Mike Futhey, now UTU President, testified against his own Vice Presidents on February 5th.

While attempts have been made to secure transcripts of the trial, the Futhey-controlled Executive Board has refused to make them available, even after promising Judge Adams they would do so in order to conduct a “fair” trial of the UTU Vice Presidents.

Stay tuned for more information on these breaking developments.

Irony

2009-02-24T11:56:00.004-05:00

One minute, Ed Michael is claiming to be a rank and file member of the UTU. The next moment, he's continuing his failed campaign to be a member of the Teamsters International Executive Board.

All this while he and his allies continue their attempts to persecute the 7 UTU Vice Presidents who took a stand for the UTU membership.

And what brush is Ed Michael and his co-conspirators painting them with?

One that claims they are working for another union.

Now that is irony.

Will the Real Mike Futhey Please Stand Up?

2009-02-23T20:46:00.015-05:00

While Mike Futhey was stating his support for the UTU-SMWIA merger, little did anyone know that he not only was secretly meeting with members of the BLET-Teamsters to file a lawsuit to stop the merger, but he was also the one who initiated the contact with them.

“I received a phone call from M.B. Futhey that resulted in a meeting Ed Michael and I had with him in Memphis . . ."
- Michael et. al plaintiff and member of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters (#4, page 8)

And now he is proclaiming that the union is spending millions in court costs, while he fails to let on that the UTU-SMWIA merger agreement already had a grievance procedure in place to protect both the UTU and SMWIA from spending member funds on unnecessary attorneys’ fees.

Mike Futhey has a gift. Besides being a railroader, his bio mentions his legal career. This explains two things. First, he must be a great attorney, given that he has no trouble taking opposite sides of the same issue. And second, his legal background explains why he would have no trouble spending millions of his union’s dollars to fight a court battle on behalf of a group of Teamster plaintiffs who he prodded into filing a lawsuit against the UTU in the first place.

Mike Futhey is trying to pull off one of the most devious tricks ever attempted in the history of our Union. Once he became UTU president, Futhey decided to jump in on both sides of the lawsuit against himself through his Teamster proxies - while planning to settle after taking over control of the defendent in the case. The UTU Vice Presidents, a majority of the UTU Board of Directors, stepped in to prevent that from happening, frustrating Futhey’s efforts to be king. Now we are where we are today, a sham trial brought about by a vindictive witch hunt and a load of members dues money that could have been saved if Futhey had gone in good faith and fought this merger through the arbitration process set up to save our hard earned dues money.

Chilling Dissent

2009-02-22T18:34:00.001-05:00

The right of free expression is a central tenet of a free society. It is this right that the existence of the labor movement itself stems from – through workers expressing themselves through collective action in order to advance a better future for themselves.

During the course of the SMWIA-UTU merger, a group of plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against the UTU seeking to impose a court-ordered injunction against the merger. During the course of these proceedings, no official from the UTU or SMWIA attempted to suppress these individuals’ rights to express themselves. To some there may have been a short term gain in doing so, but the affront to the fundamental right of every UTU and SMWIA member to free expression would be too great an affront to the rights of every UTU member and a detriment to the ability of each and every potential member of SMART to express themselves.

We learned later on, through court testimony, that these individuals were prodded to file their injunction UTU President Mike Futhey, then a UTU Vice President sitting on the union’s Executive Board. Futhey had many opportunities to voice opposition to the merger, from when he voted for it in June of 2007, to the UTU Convention where he campaigned a month later. During the six months leading up to the merger he never voiced any concerns he may have had about it but instead clandestinely worked with the individual plaintiffs (members of an outside union) seeking to put an end to a merger approved by an overwhelming majority of his members in August 2007.

Futhey’s aim, we later learned, was to prod the plaintiff’s into a lawsuit which he was planning to settle once he took office as UTU President on January 1, 2008. His plan would have worked flawlessly, if not for the fact that an overwhelmingly number of the members of the UTU Executive Board, 8 out of 10 members (not including Futhey) saw through this manipulation and challenged his grab at absolute power.

Rather than respect their rights as not only UTU members but also as elected representatives of his union’s membership, Futhey chose to have trumped up charges filed against each of these men. These charges were filed in an internal court comprised of appointees that were hand-picked by Futhey. Each of these men now facing trial shares an uncertain future with their personal and professional lives standing on the edge of ruin. All of this for speaking out against an attempt by a union President to overturn a the will of an overwhelming majority of his own membership. Rather than being portrayed as the heroes they are, Futhey has designed to sketch them as conniving villains, disloyal to his aims and a threat to his future ambitions.

Futhey’s actions are regrettable and have cast a pall over his union. He has sent a message that not only has the right to free expression within the UTU been erased, but he has chilled dissent unless it meets with his own aims.

Futhey’a attempt to defend his actions have resorted to scapegoating the SMWIA and the members of the UTU Executive Board. He now is trying to deflect attention from himself by assigning blame for the court costs his actions have cost his union to the people he has chosen as his adversaries. Futhey chose this route after having ignored an arbitration remedy already available to him through the SMART Merger Agreement – once designed to protect the treasuries of both the UTU and SMWIA by negating the need for costly litigation.

It is our hope that the UTU membership can salvage its great tradition and once again take its leadership role in the American labor movement by putting an end to this dangerous and costly dictatorship.

A Champion of the Rails Takes Center Stage

2008-08-23T21:29:00.006-04:00

I don't know if anyone realizes this, but Joe Biden may very well be one of the best supporters of railroaders in government. He's Amtrak's biggest supporter, and can you imagine what a man with a soapbox aa big as his can do for us?

Biden commutes to work each day on Amtrak and has been a strong supporter of the beleaguered rail service. He is an original co-sponsor of the Amtrak Reauthorization Bill (National Defense Rail Act), S.104, introduced on January 7, 2003. Introducing an earlier version of the bill with Sen. Fritz Hollings (D-SC) on March 6, 2002, Biden stated, "For 30 years, I have witnessed Congress dangling a carrot in front of Amtrak's eyes, funding it just enough for it to limp along. And I'll tell you, this has to stop. Now is the time to commit politically and financially to a strong, safe, and efficient passenger rail system."
Biden has been particularly concerned with rail passenger security, and has, in the words of communications director Norm Kurz "worked furiously" to secure funding for Amtrak to upgrade its tunnels, hire more cops and bomb-sniffing dogs, build more fences, and add lighting to terminals.
From this site.

Breaking Labor News

2008-08-14T11:21:00.004-04:00

Labor Movement Comes Together to File Complaint Against Wal-Mart
On August 14, the labor movement, joined by other worker rights and progressive groups, filed a formal complaint with the FEC demanding they look into Wal-Mart’s intimidation of workers. The complaint stems from a Wall Street Journal article that detailed the specific steps Wal-Mart took to encourage employees to vote against Sen. Obama because of his support of the Employee Free Choice Act.

“Wal-Mart has bullied its workers and managers for years. Now it wants to bully the political process, and the FEC should take Wal-Mart’s threats very seriously,” said AFL-CIO President John Sweeney. “Wal-Mart has shown exactly why our nation needs the Employee Free Choice Act - - we must outlaw the kind of behavior for which Wal-Mart is famous and give workers a free and fair choice on whether to form a union.”

For more informatrion on what's going on with this campaign, visit our friends at Wake Up Wal-Mart.

We Are Back!

2008-08-13T21:10:00.003-04:00

Over the last couple of weeks, we've been unable to update the site due to a hacking attempt made by somebody connected to the UTU plaintiffs.

It seems that instead of promoting the truth, they instead want to suppress it.

Fortunately, some of our friends in the law enforcement business have gotten involved in the matter. We're bursting with anticipation to find out who in the plaintiff's corner thought they could deny our LMRDA rights.

From the Heights of the Teamsters to An Anti-Merger Website

2008-05-18T23:41:00.001-04:00

The lead plaintiff in the lawsuit blocking the UTU membership's right to vote would have you believe he is just a "rank and file double header."

He has even attempted to laugh off assertions about his ties to the Teamsters, stating he's just a BLET member - and nothing else.

Nothing can be more misleading.

During his time at the Teamsters, Ed Michael accomplished a lot for someone who was just a supposed "rank and file doubleheader."

He wasn't just a dissenting voice within the Teamsters - oddly campaigning against the SMART merger on a site devoted to Teamster issues.

He wasn't just the President of BLET Division 724 in Salem, Illinois where he launched his platform calling for the takeover of the UTU.

He didn't just serve as a mouthpiece for Teamster truckers - arguing that Teamster contracts like the Master Freight Agreement don't take away jobs from railroaders.No, he made his way around the Teamsters Union, far beyond the scope of the BLET and the Teamsters Rail Conference.

Ed Michael in fact passed up an opportunity to run for a spot at the BLET Convention in 2006.

Instead, he ran for and became a leading contender for an at-large General Vice President position on the Executive Board of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters.

Not just anybody can run for one of these positions.First, you need a minimum level of support to just be on the ballot - support that doesn't just come from the railroaders in the BLET and BMWE. Second, out of two million members, only 26 serve on the vaunted Teamsters Executive Board. There is no denying the truth that Ed Michael was far and above what he claims to be, just a regular old "double header" with the resources to simultaneously launch a major lawsuit and internet campaign all by his lone self.Ed Michael has yet to come clean on his heavy involvement at the Teamsters Union - even inclusing his high profile campaign to land a seat on the 2.3 million member union's Executive Board.. The same goes for the Eubanks family who have written on Teamster issue blogs about merging us into their union and campaigning on the pages of the Teamsters Magazine itself.

The Teamster plaintiffs and their supporters need to come clean and tell us exactly what their motives us. There is too much at stake and the last thing we need is to watch our jobs pass us by as we look over at the truck traffic on the highway, thanks to the hysterics and character attacks of a group of petty snake oil salesmen.

SMWIA Answers Our Questions

2008-05-09T15:36:00.009-04:00

For the second time, we submitted questions to both the Sheet Metal and UTU leadership, and for the second time in a row, we recieved a response from President Sullivan at the Sheet Metal Workers. Once again, we have gotten no response from anyone in Cleveland.

Below is the email response we recieved from Sullivan, completely unedited and copied and pasted from our email account. One thing that stands out is Sullivan's response to a question about the UTUIA. Sullivan states that the UTUIA's independence was agreed to very early on in negotiations, and it was purposely left out of the merger in order to ensure it remain separate and intact. His response shows that the screams and hollers from the plaintiffs and their supporters about the impending sale of the UTUIA was nothing more than opportunistic rumormongering and lies.

All we have to say is keep the questions coming because it seems like we at least have some sort of a dialogue going with one of the major actors behind the SMART merger.

Click here for Mike Sullivan's previous responses.

Again I would like to thank you and your readers for taking the time to ask questions on our SMART Merger.

I have submitted answers to your questions of April 22, 2008, in the space below your questions and have highlighted them in Blue for clarity.

Michael J. Sullivan

what i really want to know is whether the merger included selling the utuia. is that true because the plaintiffs and their supporters are screaming it to the mountains without any sources.

In our merger negotiations it appeared early on the UTUIA may have been subsidizing the UTU through the payment of salaries of some of the officers. In our opinion this was not a sound business practice for either organization and both organizations needed to operate independently. To assure this independence, we took the position very early on that the UTUIA would not be a part of the merger and a separation would be maintained.

The UTUIA should be an independent organization who provides service and pricing to its members based on its cost alone. The exclusion of the UTUIA from the Merger Document should make it obvious there was no intent by the SMWIA to sell off the UTUIA, nor to control it.

When Vice President Futhey met with attorney Fox was Futhey being paid by the UTU? When Vice President Futhey called the anti merger boys did the UTU pay for the call? When Vice President Futhey turned over documentation to Fox, was he on UTU time or his own time? Did he use a UTU computer or a UTU fax or a stamp paid for by UTU? Is Vice President Futhey guilty of misusing union funds? I voted for the merger and he is using my dues money to cancel my vote.

It would appear through his own affidavit President Futhey met with Attorney Fox and others concerning the suit that was filed. As the membership of the UTU had supported the merger as did then General President Thompson and by their vote the UTU Executive Board, unless then Vice-President Futhey had spoken to General President Thompson or presented his concerns to the Executive Board for support, which it appears he did not, he was acting without authority as an officer of the UTU when he met Attorney Fox and others.

What kind of deal did futhey strike with these guys when he met with them back in october?

I have no knowledge of this.

This is a question. I stumbled on a web page titled utucandidate.com. There was a three or four page statement on that site concerning the UTU's finances. At the end of the statement reference was made to the UTUIA subsidizing UTU officer salaries and that process was supposed to end on January 1, 2008. Has that subsidizing by UTUIA stopped? Also in view of the level of the general fund and other funds is there a sizeable dues increase facing UTU members?

Early in our discussions on a possible merger it was clear the then current structure of the UTU was in our opinion top heavy and was not economically sustainable. UTU General President Thompson agreed with this assessment and was in the process of making changes that would bring the UTU into a position of economic stability. As these initial meetings lead to merger talks, the SMWIA made it clear we were not in agreement with continuation of the subsidy of UTU officer salaries by the UTUIA and wanted a complete separation of the UTUIA and the UTU in their operational structures. Whether this has as yet happened I have no specific knowledge.
As you are aware a dues increase did occur in January and was deemed by General President Thompson as necessary to stabilize the finances of the UTU. Even with the dues increase it was the opinion of General President Thompson such an increase would not allow for an increase in the number of staff, but would only serve to stabilize the current cash flow within the UTU.

Is it true that President Mike Futhey has been charged and the Chairman of the UTU Executive Board tabled the charges?

I have no knowledge of this.

Is it true that Vice President Mike Futhey 2007, provided information to anti UTU attorney Fox in November of 2007 to support the anti-merger movement?

It would appear by President Futhey’s affidavit that he met with attorney Fox in November of 2007. The substance of that meeting is known only to President Futhey and Attorney Fox.

Is it true that Vice President Futhey was acting without the authority of the UTU President in 2007 when he provided documentation to anti-union Fox?

If in fact then Vice-President Futhey provided UTU documents to Attorney Fox , it would appear this was done without the authorization or authority to do so.

I just heard some bad news about the UTU’s DIP program from a UTU insurance representative who is blaming former President Thompson for DIP’s problems. Could this website fill us in on the truth about DIP?

The current financial condition of the DIPP Program is a question for President Futhey.

As to my knowledge of the program, there was discussion by General President Thompson regarding the underfunded position of the program. He stated he believed for the program to survive there would have to be a combination of plan changes and contribution increases. It was my understanding General President Thompson made the changes prior to his leaving on January 1, 2008.

It is also my understanding that President Futhey has undone some of those changes, what effect those changes would have on the fund is unclear. Time will only tell if the fund will survive in its current position.

Remember This?

2008-05-07T12:36:00.002-04:00

Those of you familiar with the UTU.org website might remember a lot of material was erased from it on January 1st when the Futhey regime took over. What was changed, in particular, was almost every reference to the SMART merger - denying members access to the information provided to them earlier on the site about the merger and blocking their ability to see the information at dispute for themselves.

Thankfully, we have been able to retrieve that information, for now at least.

Who wants to bet on how long it will take for the page we link to to be deleted?

From A Site Reader: Death By A Thousand Cuts

2008-05-05T16:15:00.004-04:00

I'm still troubled by all the finger pointing, name calling and outright slander of officers who have served this organization for many years. I've listened to the CD that was sent and will listen to it again but was Paul wrong in saying a delegate w/ a $250. airfare instead was paid several thousand dollars to attend our convention. And this practice should continue. How would your members feel about that?

When Paul spoke about craft autonomy I think what I heard was "is it right for 10 members of a craft to vote down an agreement for the majority." Is it time to look at that for the good of all? He spoke in an open forum. I don't think what he said was meant to be a secret though I don't think he was aware he was being recorded.

That says more about those doing the recording than who was being recorded. I've felt for some time in the guise of protecting our members rights and constitution an agenda has been pushed because some members realized there was going to be changes in how the UTU would operate as part of SMART. I never thought from the time the merger was first announced till now that we would continue to do business in the same way that we had.

I did think we would have a greater sense of autonomy than with any other merger partner. In addition the SMWIA in the merger document put enough UTU officers on their General Executive Board (?) that we (UTU) could stop actions by that Board.

As a minority union I don't think we could have asked for a better deal. And it sure didn't sound to me like SMWIA was trying to take advantage of us. I realize that's my opinion and you're free to disagree.

Finally there are many ways for an organization to die, quickly or by a thousand cuts.

Plaintiffs Responses to Discovery Questions

2008-04-22T10:15:00.009-04:00

The files (attached below) containing the discovery responses from the original lawsuit plaintiffs were forwarded to us today by an anonymous source. From what we can gather, it seems the statements in them were made sometime last week.

The plaintiffs definitely seem to be trying to be as tight-lipped and evasive as possible as judging by their refusal to discuss anything that reveals their ties to the Teamsters. Roy Arnold, for one, refused to answer a single question beyond admitting to have thrown out some documents he had in his possession.

Even, a lot of new information comes to light that none of us in the UTU seem to have had any knowledge of before:

Everyone knows that President Mike Futhey cooperated with the plaintiffs by providing them with an affidavit in support of their effort to stop the merger. We know at the same time he did this, he was still telling everyone around him he was for the merger and had ample opportunity to come out against the merger numerous times at the UTU Convention and at an October Board meeting. What we did not know is that according to Jim Eubanks, it turns out Futhey was the one who started the ball rolling against the merger by initiating contact with the Teamster plants! According to Eubanks: “I received a phone call from M.B. Futhey that resulted in a meeting Ed Michael and I had with him in Memphis during which we learned, generally and for the first time, that Paul Thompson's representations about the UTU Constitution remaining intact as part of a SMART Constitution, and preservation of UTU autonomy, were disingenuous and false."

Ed Michael refused to answer questions about or deny his involvement in the Teamsters. This includes what offices he ran for, statements he made while at the Teamsters, positions he took as a Teamsters official, and his effort at merging the UTU into the Teamsters.

Ed Michael, in an amazing moment of clarity actually answered questions about his membership in the UTU. It seems that Ed Michael left the UTU in 1992 and did not come back until last year – just in time to launch his bid to derail the membership’s vote for the merger.

About funding of the lawsuit, Eubanks testifies that “Contributions to plaintiffs’ Save Our Union fund have been received, to date, from 66 individual members, ranging from $20 to $1,600, and from 29 subordinate UTU entities, ranging from $100 (US) to $30,000 (Canadian). In addition, a retired UTU member loaned plaintiffs the $35,000 required, at the outset, to retain Mr. Fox.” Who is this retired UTU member with $35,000 to burn? The answer to that I’m sure may turn a lot of heads.

It’s interesting that the plaintiffs seem to be doing everything they possibly can to pressure the 7 UTU Vice Presidents into caving into King Futhey’s wishes – rather than let the process continue towards one of discovery where the plaintiffs’ motives and plans are exposed. Though they refused to answer a lot of important questions, we’re confident they will eventually have to fess up in one way or another. It’s not just the Court that will begin pressuring them, it’s also the mounting pressure on their allies in Cleveland that will force them to.

Click on the following to view .pdf scans taken of each of the plaintiffs' depositions:

Roy Arnold Discovery Responses
Jim Eubanks' Discovery Responses
Jon Hasenauer Discovery Responses
Ed Michael Discovery Responses
Save Our Union Checks
Fox Engagement Letter

Open Letter from Don Lindsey - UTU Local 533

2008-04-21T10:39:00.004-04:00

This was an open letter sent to the Save Our Union web site. It was signed by me and if you post this I want to be sure that no one thinks I am ashamed or afraid to be associated with my comments.

Don Lindsey
Member, UTU Local 533

Keeley Letter In Support of Free Expression

2008-04-18T14:07:00.003-04:00

April 10, 2008

Re: My UTU Constitution Rights Related to the UTU / SMWIA SMART Merger

Dear Gentlemen, Sirs and Brothers,

Thank you for your long and distinguished careers of service to others. I am reminded of Petty Officer 2nd Class Michael Monsoor, who was awarded the Medal of Honor posthumously for making the ultimate sacrifice. Mike and two teammates had taken position on the outcropping of a rooftop when an insurgent grenade bounced off Mike's chest and landed on the roof. Mike had a clear chance to escape, but he realized that the other two SEALs did not. In that terrible moment, he had two options -- to save himself, or to save his friends. For Mike, this was no choice at all. He threw himself onto the grenade, and absorbed the blast with his body. One of the survivors puts it this way: "Mikey looked death in the face that day and said, 'You cannot take my brothers. I will go in their stead.'" What Petty Officer Monsoor did inspires awe.

It is with this thought in mind that I want to thank each of you for your steadfast courage in the face of vile attempts to slander and defame you by just a handful of unhappy Brothers who will be the only beneficiaries of their selfish and unreasonable anti-union actions.

I ask that you would continue in your efforts to protect the rights of myself and other dues paying members that voted in favor of the Smart merger.

I beg that you would continue in your efforts to protect the autonomy of this and other Committees, and their General Chairpersons’ rights who have written letters supporting the SMART merger, without fear of the threat of retribution for dissenting from the opinions of other UTU Members and Officials.

I plead that you would continue in your efforts to protect the autonomy of myself and other UTU Delegates that support the SMART merger, without fear of the threat of retribution for dissenting from the opinion of other UTU Members and Officials.

In closing, I continue to support the SMART merger, along with all of you, because I believe it will bring stability to the labor movement, protect our autonomy, increase the volume of our voice united as one and strengthen labor’s ability to secure a better working environment now and well into our future.

Fraternally,

Robert J. Keeley
General Chairman, UTU, GO-342
Cc General Distribution

Breaking: An Inconvenient Fact

2008-04-02T11:01:00.012-04:00

If you want to figure out a man's motives, look for what he's trying to hide.

The lead plaintiff in the lawsuit blocking the UTU membership's right to vote would have you believe he is just a "rank and file double header." He has even attempted to laugh off assertions about his ties to the Teamsters, stating he's just a BLET member - and nothing else.

Nothing can be more misleading.

During his time at the Teamsters, Ed Michael accomplished a lot for someone who was just a supposed "rank and file doubleheader."

He wasn't just a dissenting voice within the Teamsters - oddly campaigning against the SMART merger on a site devoted to Teamster issues.

He wasn't just the President of BLET Division 724 in Salem, Illinois where he launched his platform calling for the takeover of the UTU.

He didn't just serve as a mouthpiece for Teamster truckers - arguing that Teamster contracts like the Master Freight Agreement don't take away jobs from railroaders.

No, he made his way around the Teamsters Union, far beyond the scope of the BLET and the Teamsters Rail Conference.

Ed Michael in fact passed up an opportunity to run for a spot at the BLET Convention in 2006. Perhapsthe BLET was small peanuts to him.

Instead, he ran for and became a leading contender for an at-large General Vice President position on the Executive Board of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters.

Not just anybody can run for one of these positions.

First, you need a minimum level of support to just be on the ballot - support that doesn't just come from the railroaders in the BLET and BMWE.

Second, out of two million members, only 26 members are allowed to serve on the vaunted Teamsters Executive Board. In fact, out of the 26, only a grand total of 2 represent rail Teamsters. One of the two, John Murphy, is a 40 year Teamster who never served as a member on the railroad but was awarded the position of Rail Conference Chair due to his loyalty and work in merging the BMWE and BLET into the union. Only one Executive Board member, Fred Simpson, is a true railroader who cut his teeth on the rails rather than the highways of North America.

There is no denying the truth that Ed Michael was far and above what he claims to be, just a regular old "double header" with the resources to simultaneously launch a major lawsuit and internet campaign all by his lone self.

Ed Michael has yet to come clean on his heavy involvement at the Teamsters Union - even inclusing his high profile campaign to land a seat on the 2.3 million member union's Executive Board.. The same goes for the Eubanks family who have written on Teamster issue blogs about merging us into their union and campaigning on the pages of the Teamsters Magazine itself.
The Teamster plaintiffs and their supporters need to come clean and tell us exactly what their motives us. There is too much at stake and the last thing we need is to watch our jobs pass us by as we look over at the truck traffic on the highway, thanks to the hysterics and character attacks of a group of petty snake oil salesmen.

Letters of Support

2008-03-30T23:56:00.005-04:00

Contrary to what the plaintiffs and their cronies would have us believe, letters of support are coming in for the seven Vice Presidents who made a stand for the voting rights of UTU members.

These seven men are all that stands between a free democratic union and a takeover where dissent is squashed through the use of trumped up charges, rumor, character assassination and innuendo. They are the victims of a vindictive and divisive campaign of libel, slander and ridicule based on the personal ambitions of a select few who are putting their interests above those of their union.

These letters of support link to the original pdf documents found at utucandidate.com.

RS Knutson, General Chairman GO-245
". . .during our darkest times, intolerance prevailed internally. I am therefore deeply concerned with the manner in which members of our governing body are being subjected to unfounded ridicule, charges, and now charges, for voicing their disagreement with your attempts to derail the SMART merger between the UTU and SMWIA."

AL Suozzo, General Chairman GO 769
". . .without the right of dissent by the Board of Directors, we will have a dictatorship."

Barry Abbott, General Chairman GO 721
"Perhaps in 1969 when the UTU was originally formed, disagreements such as what we are experiencing today existed as well. I don't recall the differences of that era resulting in charges and countercharges being filed."

James A Houk, General Chairman 679
". . .their removal from office and expulsion from this union would have devastating long term consequences."

JL Schollmeyer, General Chairman GO 386
"Your January 4, 2008 posting on the UTU website was entitled "Let Them Explain Themselves" - will you ever give those officers an opportunity t o address the members as you have asked?"

John Hancock, Genera Chairman GO 851
"While I am sure that many of the individuals who levied these charges are good Brothers and Sisters, I also find it interesting that many of the "stand" to be elevated if the charged indviduals are removed from office. They can say "it isn't so." but the stench will linger, and it will smack of personal gain."

LR Bumpurs, General Chairman GO 577
"this course is especially not favorable to the members we represent or to the prospective members."

Pat Ojard, General Chairman GO 325
" We do not see how the UTU can in good conscience continue down the path to charge these men on this pathetic excuse for a political housecleaning. I trust that these charges will be sent to their rightful place, the nearest trash receptacle.

Patrick F Reilly, General Chairman GO 610
"the proposed process and imposing of these charges will definitely divide our union."

Robert Keeley, General Chairman GO 342
"the face the very real possibility of capital punishment merely for being steadfast in their dissent of President Futhey's opinion concerning the SMART merger and the protections afforded by the UTU Constitution. Their efforts are meant to protect our members' democratic rights. . ."

WE Young, General Chairman GO 17
"We must maintain the checks and balances that the forefathers of this union provided in our Constitution or we are nothing short of a dictatorship."

MJ Reedy, General Chairman GO 225
"Your leadership is sorely needed at this time to quell the internal strife in our union, and to reassure those members that those officers they elected will continue to serve this organization."

Richard H Westbrook, NC State Legislative Director
"I urge the Executive Board to recognize these charges for what they are, vindictive and revengeful, and to do the right thing by dismissing these charges.

Rick Johnson, Colorado State Legislative Director
"With the phrase - the membership deserves better, in this matter, they deserve these charges be laid to rest in the best interest of the UTU."

Thomas E Hensler, Indiana State Legislative Director
"What started out as nothing more than union salting of another union by a couple of Teamster radicals quickly became a feeding frenzy fueled by the SMART merger."

Timothy S Deneen, Wisconsin State Legislative Director
"To silence those who differ is neither healthy nor democratic."

CM English, Texas State Legislative Director
"I find those bringing the charges have taken very small kernels of truth and spun them into a whole harvest of exaggeration, retribution, vengeance, false accusations and innuendo."

Daniel J O Connell, NJ State Legislative Director
"many (of the charges) are from officers holding alternate positions who will benefit by ascending to the offices presently held by these individuals."

George Casey, New England Legislative Director/Chairman
"The philosopher George Santayana advised: Those who do not remember the past are bound to repeat it."

Joseph Szabo, Illinois State Legislative Director
"Any attempt to stifle debate or punish dissenters should be viewed as an attack on our union."

Lawrence Kasecamp, Maryland State Legislative Director
"The bottom line is that these individuals, as well as any member, has the right to take a position they deem appropriate regarding any issue before our organization and they should not be expected to be retaliated against with frivolous charges for doing so."

Ronald Koran, Local 1594 General Chairperson
"I find it disturbing that certain officers continue to support the anti UTU "Save Our Union" website while filing charges against our own brothers."

Local 1067
"Goose-stepping groupthink gave us the Iraq War and Class I management, it has no place in the business of a brotherhood."

Walter W Yeatts
"There are some members of our union that are bent on revenge and settling old scores. Our union is better than that. These members are attempting to hurt our union and bring people up on charges that are based on nothing more than a member disagreeing with the judgement of a member of the Board of Directors."

An Attack On Free Speech

2008-03-28T17:50:00.003-04:00

According to the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act:

"It shall be unlawful for any person through the use of force or violence, or threat of the use of force or violence, to restrain, coerce, or intimidate, or attempt to restrain, coerce, or intimidate any member of a labor organization for the purpose of interfering with or preventing the exercise of any right to which he is entitled under the provisions of this Act. "

We are nothing more than regular old UTU members. We have no ties to the Teamsters Union, no financial assistance from any DLCs looking to get back to the Boyd/Little years, and not too much skill when it comes to manipulating html code.

When we started this, we went to a friend of ours from back in New York who does know a thing or two about html codes and asked if he could lend us some assistance. As an old high school friend, he agreed.

For that, he got his name, address and telephone number plastered all over the Internet by the plaintiffs who are blocking the democrat rights of the thousands of UTU members who voted in for the SMART merger in August.

Ironic, isn't it, that the same people who supposedly "champion" the democratic rights of UTU members such as ourselves are the first to veto the exercise of those rights when they don't fit into their world view. Isn't it ironic that they're the same people who also are now attempting to suppress a dissenting viewpoint by posting the personal information related to an individual who helped us set up this web site?

Even more interesting is that the four Teamsters conveniently had the resources and access to the UTU database to do a very quick search on our friend's name.

Releasing membership information like that to outsiders is a serious violation of the memberships' privacy rights, made worse if it was done by someone on the inside at UTU headquarters in Cleveland.

To those who chose to take it upon themselves to shut down dissent through intimidating it by plastering some one's private information all over the Internet, we have this nugget from section 209 of the LMRDA:

Any person who willfully violates this title shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.

What the plaintiffs and their supporters don't want people to talk about is their motives for their lawsuit. And the only way to find their motives is to take them at their words. Their past words that is. The words they scrubbed from their websites when they embarked on their twisted journey of character assassination, innuendo and intimidation.

Posting someone's personal information with the intention of intimidating them is something we've come to accept from a group of Teamsters, so we shouldn't have been surprised.

2008-03-27T09:22:00.009-04:00

First they ignore you. Then they fight you. Then you win.
--Mohandas Gandhi.

Those words ring as true today as they did when they were first uttered decades ago. The four "Teamsters of the Apocalypse" first attempted to ignore this site, they found that they couldn't.

They then tried to laugh off our research uncovering their deep ties within the Teamsters. Of course, now they see we knew more than they thought we did.

And now, in a last gasp of desperation, they've taken to an anti-democratic tactic originated in places like China and Iran. In China, blog spot sites such as ours are banned or discouraged from being visited by goverment officials due to "reports" that readers have and will be stricken with computer viruses. They do this to keep the roots of democracy from spreading by controlling the information their citizens see to only what the government approves.

Borrowing from Communist China, the Teamster Four are now urging readers to avoid our site or suffer from a horrible "keystroke virus" which will permanently damage your computer and allow us access to all your personal and private information.

What the "Four Teamsters of the Apocalypse" won't talk about is their whereabouts before the UTU membership voted on the recent merger. They won't discuss Ed Michael's work to recruit UTU members into the Teamsters, they won't discuss their involvement in the 2006 Teamster Convention, not their years of work with other Teamster groups looking to bring the rail unions within the Teamster fold.

And good luck getting them to talk about the Teamster agreements like the MFA which seek to remove fright from the rails in order to preserve trucking jobs.

Maye it's too difficult a task, talking about the truth when there's no room for it on their agenda.

We as UTU members deserve to hear the truth. From every side. That's why this site emailed both Presidents Futhey and Sullivan and asked for direct information (submitted by site members) from original sources -- not rumors and innuendo that have been used to divide and distract us.

That is why we make every attempt to link all our material here to the original source --- rather than tell readers what they should be thinking as is done on the other site. We have too much respect for our readers' intelligence to do that - show people sources and they have the brains to make their own conclusions themselves.

Ww feel when presented with the facts, members will make up their own minds. That's why over 1,500 visitors have come to our site just this week. Because like us, our brothers and sisters want facts, not rumor mongering, character assasination, or childish threats.

We will continue to seek and tell the truth about the SMART merger.

It's our hope that the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse make some attempt to their claim of promoting democratic trade unionism.

But we are not holding our breath for that.

Ed Michael on Competition

2008-03-26T15:46:00.000-04:00

“Competition between IBT trucks and railroads is virtually non-existent. In fact, these two modes of transportation work together efficiently!”

Taken from the BLET Division 724 Membership Packet written by Division President Dale Edward Michael.

For a railroader to believe the plaintiffs who say there is no competition between IBT trucks and the railroads means you have to believe in the tooth fairy, Santa Claus, and that Weapons of Mass Destruction are due to show up in Iraq any day now.

The truth is, there is competition. And due to back room deals made behind the backs of railroaders, we in the UTU are losing out thanks to Michael, Eubanks, Don Hahs and their and their friends at the IBT.

All it takes is a quick read through the IBT Master Freight Agreement (MFA), where it’s plain to see whose side the IBT is not on.

Below are the ground rules the Teamsters set in 2005 for who gets to transport intermodal freight. As you can see, not only do over the road truckers win out, but the MFA lays out the groundwork on Teamster plans to promote trucking jobs at the expense of the rail industry:

Total intermodal rail miles included on line 303 of Schedule 300 of the BTS Annual Report shall not exceed 28 percent of the Employer’s total
miles as reported on line 301 of Schedule 300 of the BTS Annual
Report during any calendar year. . . Effective for Calendar Year 2005
and thereafter, the maximum amount of rail miles as a percent of total miles as calculated above will be reduced from 28% to 26%.

Since the intermodal clause was first put in place, the IBT insisted on renegotiating its share of trucking miles at intermodal sites.

Guess who lost out on that deal?

Yes, the same railroaders that Ed Michael and the Akron plaintiffs want to merge into theTeamsters - the very union openly lobbying to take our jobs away:

Subject to the provisions of Section 6 of the Article, total intermodal rail
miles included on line 303 of Schedule 300 of the BTS Annual Report shall not
exceed 24 percent of the Employer’s total miles as reported on line 301 of
Schedule 300 of the BTS Annual Report during any calendar year. In the event
intermodal rail miles exceed this 24% maximum, the Employer shall be required to remove an appropriate amount of freight from the rail and add a corresponding number of drivers at each affected domicile.

A 28% share of the freight in 2005 that the Teamsters shrunk down to a 24% share today.

But according to Ed Michael, competition is virtually non-existent, right?

The current terms of the MFA are only the tip of the iceberg.

The agreement goes on to detail the IBTs’ future plans for its vision of adding drivers to the detriment of rail workers:

The parties recognize that the current shipping markets demand expedited delivery of freight in a manner that may not be accomplished by hauling certain freight by rail.

Last time I checked, I thought the price of gas was increasing demand for rail, not decreasing it. But what do I know. If Ed Michael says it's true it must be, right?

These market demands create a need to reduce the amount of freight hauled
by rail and to use alternative methods of substitute service.

Unless the Starship Enterprise is an alternate method of transportation, they mean truckers.

As contemplated by Article 20, Section 4, new business opportunities may be
pursued that promote new Teamster job opportunities while protecting existing
Teamster jobs, benefits, and working conditions.

Once again, Teamster jobs, benefits and working conditions only apply to truckers. Railroaders never figure into the equation as Teamsters:

With these facts in mind, the rail miles as a percentage of total miles
will be reduced as follows:

effective Calendar Year 2010, the maximum amount of rail
miles as a percentage of total miles as calculated above will be reduced
from 24% to 21.5%.

Effective Calendar Year 2011, the maximum amount of rail miles as a percentage of total miles as calculated above will be reduced from 21.5% to 21%.

Effective Calendar Year 2012, the maximum amount of rail miles as a percentage of total miles as calculated above will be reduced from 21% to 19%.

Maybe Ed Michael is right. Maybe competition is virtually non-existent. Competition only exists if it’s allowed, not when the rules are written to benefit one side over the other. Maybe that’s what Ed Michael meant. . .competition is non-existent because it's not even allowed.

According to a handout found at Teamsters.org, the Master Freight Agreement assures truckers that it “allows enough freight to be taken off the rails to create new jobs for at least 1,000 Teamster drivers.”

Not a single word about creating jobs for the railroaders that Ed Michael has been lobbying to join the Teamsters.

Instead of fighting their international on behalf of their members’ interests, Teamsters like Ed Michael and Jimmy Eubanks have resorted to slithering on over to our union to block OUR democratically held vote. According to Michael’s old Division 724 website, it’s all in the hope of folding OUR UNION into the Teamsters instead:

We believe that once the operating crafts, and ultimately all rail labor unions unite as Teamsters, we can successfully compete in the bargaining arena to win good contracts for not only transportation employees, but for every rail labor
employee.

Just A Rank and File Doubleheader?

2008-03-25T09:42:00.004-04:00

Justin (aka "Jimmy") Eubanks will tell you he's just another doubleheader. That's far from the truth.

Like Ed Michael, Eubanks is heavily involved in the Teamsters Union, going so far as to serve as a delegate for Tom Leedham at the 2006 Teamster Convention.

Above is a screen shot taken from the September 2006 Teamster Magazine during the time Eubanks was helping the Leedham campaign at the Teamsters.