1) causing dissent in the ranks2) failure to uphold the union oath
3) defrauding the union.
The real crime of the convicted Carpenters was that they ran a well-organized election campaign promising to reform their union on a pro-democracy basis, and they won.
Their campaign succeeded because they reached out to the union rank and file at the work sites while campaigning to fight for more democracy and transparency in the union and, more importantly, for better contracts by fighting harder against the employers attempts to reduce the standard of living of the membership. The reform group raised all of the money at their disposal at work sites from rank and file Carpenters.
Turmoil had been simmering in the Regional Council for quite some time, since century-old Carpenters locals throughout the state of Oregon and South West Washington were shut down and merged into a “mega-local,” which was done in a way that restricted the democracy previously enjoyed by the smaller locals.
For example, rural carpenters were made to drive hours to attend a union meeting if they wanted a voice in their union, since their local office was closed. Statewide decisions were centralized without the ability of carpenters to participate in the decision making process on a local level. The connectedness that Carpenters felt to their union was removed by hundreds of miles; their personal investment in their union was forcibly made impersonal.
The “mega-local” phenomenon has been a virus running throughout organized labor for years, creating the above, predictable effects. The reform-minded Carpenters saw this happening in their union and fought back against it.
This restriction of democracy was also occurring at the Northwest Regional Council of Carpenters, which had centralized power over the encompassing states by the Council’s ability to appoint business agents, staff organizers, and bargain contracts. Instead of the union fighting the employer for better wages, the Regional Council talked endlessly about “partnerships” with the boss, which came at the direct expense of the wages of Carpenters.
There is no evidence that the convicted carpenters did anything wrong. In fact, they have federal labor law on their side. The Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 (LMRDA) was created to give basic democratic rights within all labor unions and covers basic standards for union elections and free speech rights. (An excellent book on the interesting history of the LMRDA is Rebels, Reformers and Racketeers by Herman Benson.)
The accused Carpenters used these rights by campaigning and winning elections in their union. Unfortunately for their accusers, a “get out the vote” phone bank is not against any Carpenter rule, nor against federal labor law.
Staff from the Regional Council falsely accused the convicted carpenters of “stealing” the Carpenter’s membership list – with no evidence – and proceeded to slander them to the membership through a website and numerous mailings, calling the accused “thieves” and “liars,” unacceptable behavior in any union.
After losing the election the displaced leadership complained to the Carpenters International and a second set of elections was then organized. The reform Carpenters won that election by a larger margin. So now the candidates they defeated are trying to get them out of office using internal charges, based on the phone banking “scandal.” The LMRDA does not allow unions to target activists using vague accusations like “causing dissension.”
Dissent simply means disagreement, which is perfectly normal and natural in every union, which is why there are federally regulated union elections to express this dissent. Also, “dissent” is an overly broad concept that, in this case, infringed upon the Carpenter’s federally protected free speech rights, making the convictions illegal. Perhaps the best evidence that these convicted carpenter’s were wrongly convicted was the composition of the jury that decided their fate. The Carpenter’s “trial committee” is supposed to be a standing (ongoing) committee comprised of regional delegates, picked by lottery. However, for this trial the standing committee was abolished, and a new committee put into place.
The lottery system could not have been used to select the new trial committee. One third of the lottery pool consisted of delegates from Oregon, and the trial committee had zero Oregon delegates: there is a 1.2 percent likelihood that this could happen in a lottery. The hand picked jury contained no Oregon delegates because the convicted Carpenters were Oregonians.
The injustices committed against these carpenters negatively affects all unions, since such undemocratic practices look horrible to the general public, and provides anti-union groups with easy ammunition.
The convictions also weaken the carpenters union directly, since many of their hardest fighting pro-union members are members without membership rights. A weakened Carpenters union consequently weakens labor as a whole.
Shamus Cooke is a social service worker and trade unionist. He can reached at email@example.com