I guess shuper is just a little rat.

[Tin Basher2]

When the email below was forwarded to me I found out shuper has filed a complaint with Boeing ethics over some email McCarty sent to the council reps.

I also see now that shuper is just a shill for the Dedicated Unionists. I can not imagine anyone I call a friend ratting out a brother who stood with us on the line night after night in the freakin’ rain. Some of those Boeing managers have a long memory I don’t doubt for a minute they wouldn’t use this as an excuse to settle a few scores from the strike.

Here is the super puke whining to Boeing to discipline McCarty. And don't forget we’re suppose to be outraged that Charlie used to sign some tax form but the only thing my friends care about is we finally got the EIP. But I’m supposed to believe the Negotiation Team didn’t have anything to do with it. Then why the hell don’t the WTPU have the EIP.

shuper's email:

RGOOD OF THE UNION 9 MARCH 2006 -REV
BY DONALD SHUPER RETIRED ASSOCIATE MEMBER IN GOOD STANDIN G

AS OFFICERS OF THE UNION YOU SHOULD BE VERY CONCERNED THAT YOUR LEADERS HAVE SHOWN NO CONCERN FOR MEMBERS RIGHTS, MEMBERS DUES, OR RESPONSIBILITY TO FOLLOW FEDERAL LAW. THIS ISSUE AND HOW IT WAS HANDLED/HIDDEN IS BUT ONE EXAMPLE

I filed serious charges [REF A ] relating to financial malfeasance [CESO- $20,000 TO $200,000] and other violations of SPEEA Governing documents on DEC 19, 2005. The immediate response by Mr McCarty was an abuse of his position and an abuse of the Boeing e-mail system. As he and your leaders have known,

I filed a complaint about his actions and that of Charles Bofferding
with Boeing Ethics, and have confirmed Boeing IS investigating..

On Jan 16, a still secret hearing board was convened, and charges were dismissed. [ REF B ] The board, its formation, its meeting, and the results ALL violate federal law [Ref D ].

All members were not notified, and neither side had a fair hearing for example.
Regular members have unquestioned standing to file and reqeuest enforcement by the DOL. Non regular members musty first overcome the improper Governing Documents

ITS YOUR UNION- YOUR MONEY - DEMAND ACCOUNTIBILITY .

REF A: Charges found at http://home.att.net/~amember/ChargesFiled19DecR.pdf
Tom McCarty widely published on Dec 22 "."Why is it necessary to defend ourselves against the ravings of a confused and bitter person " Charles Bofferding widely published on Dec 22 ""Why do you let him waste our time like this when we have important things to do?"

REF B: http://home.att.net/~amember/sp06_017charges.pdf - Secret Hearing Board results
. . . The Board considered the testimony of the SPEEA Governing Documents Committee Chair who stated that the most recent referendum revisions to the Constitution had NOT[ocr typo] Error intended to allow for anyone other than Regular Members to bring charges.

. . . Based on this input and our interpretation of the SPEEA governing documents, the Hearing Board unanimously finds that Mr. Shuper does NOT have standing to file charges against SPEEA members and officers. All charges are dismissed.

Signed this day, January 16th, 2006. Alan Rice Hearing Board Chair
REF C: http://tinyurl.com/jbdxt is LMRDA See section 101(2) FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND ASSEMBLY. REF D: http://tinyurl.com/fnv7s is 29CFR417.2

(1) A reasonable opportunity is afforded for filing charges of serious misconduct against any elected
officer(s) without being subject to retaliatory threats, coercion, or acts of
intimidation.

(2) The charges of serious misconduct are communicated to the accused officer(s), and reasonable
notice is given the members of the organization, reasonably in advance of the time for hearing thereon. REF D1: 417.3 Initiation of proceedings.

[DonShuper]

10PM Friday --
If you are going to quote me- why not put the header in 'GOOD OF THE UNION"

And had you bothered to look- you would have found the same thing-with headers and explanation at

http://www.msdsite.com/forums/showth...=9765#post9765

oxymoron-incumbents and integrity thread post number 7

I'll repeat just the first part of the post here
FOR THE GOOD OF THE UNION
5@92 322PM PST THURS - 9 MARCH
===
The following was sent a few hours ago to SPEEA- NW council officers-and Gov docs Kommittee. I discovered a typo [ caused by OCR of the alan rice 'hearing board' results which made an underlined NOT into the letter '"a" ] in my supplied pdf file and made a quick correction and resubmittal. Hopefully- it will get distributed- and hopefully - someone will bring it up under new business or be part of the motion re CESO $$- It is obviouls that the current 'leaders' have absolutey NO concept of right and wrong- could care less or are ignorant of federal laws- and have real ethics considerably below even the Boeing Company !
===

Subject: GOOD OF UNION REQUEST*REVISED

*****Found a ocr typo error in Alan rice letter - word NOT came out as a - here is revised--- sorry DON ***

- - - http://home.att.net/~amember/RGOODOFUNIONR.pdf - - -

===== >>>>>>

It was submited under the 'good of the union" - and of course it was ignored and not distributed or mentioned. Says a lot for the SPEEA council leaders doesn't it!

And it had zip to do with the election- since the events started BEFORE anyone filed a petition. - that two of the three perps decided to run - and subvert the process is NOT the issue.
I do have the right to submit such a request- and SPEEA has NO right to prevent me from bringing it up - in person or by flyer or e-mail A concept called free speech which you wouldn't understand.

Obviously you could care less about malfeasance, improper use of members dues, etc. And as to when your 'leaders' became aware that I had filed with boeing- I told them on Sat, 25 Feb 2006 22:16:53 -0800 Subject: SPEEA OFFICER ABUSE OF Boeing E-MAIL- and did not hide the ethics e-mail address
From : DONALD SHUPER BOEING RETIREE- SPEEA ASSOCIATE MEMBER - REDMOND WASHINGTON

TO: BOEING ETHICS
SPEEA COUNCIL OFFICERS
IFPTE PRESIDENT GREG JUNEMANN
SPEEA COUNSEL PHYLLIS ROGERS

NOTE TO BOEING ETHICS- PLEASE ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT AND FORWARD THIS TO MR DOUG BAINS
MY HOME PHONE NUMBER IS -----
SUBJECT: SPEEA TREASURER AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR HAVE ABUSED THEIR ACCESS TO THE BOEING E-MAIL SYSTEM AND USED SPEEA AND COMPANY RESOURCES TO LIBEL, SLANDER, AND DISPARAGE ME.

The attached PDF file [ abusebyspeea.pdf ] supports my complaint against Mr. McCarty and Mr. Bofferding, and the refusal to act by the SPEEA E-board.

This is a complaint about Mr Tom McCarty, currently SPEEA Treasurer and Executive Board Member for abusing his SPEEA Executive Officer Status AND his resulting unique access to internal Boeing e-mail systems such that he can secretly publish his libelous statements against me. Mr Charles Bofferding has tried to intimidate anyone who dared reveal what they published to over 60 Boeing SPEEA Officers and members on the Boeing internal e-mail system.
went on --->>
**** IOW it was NOT a secret allegation at all - and it is/was well documented

have a nice evening - and dont get caught handing out or posting on company property or union boards the salmon pink flyers with false allegations - you never know who may rat YOU out

Meanwhile - --

[Tin Basher2]

When the email below was forwarded to me I found out shuper has filed a complaint with Boeing ethics over some email McCarty sent to the council reps.

I also see now that shuper is just a shill for the Dedicated Unionists. I can not imagine anyone I call a friend ratting out a brother who stood with us on the line night after night in the freakin’ rain. Some of those Boeing managers have a long memory I don’t doubt for a minute they wouldn’t use this as an excuse to settle a few scores from the strike.

Here is the super puke whining to Boeing to discipline McCarty. And don't forget we’re suppose to be outraged that Charlie used to sign some tax form but the only thing my friends care about is we finally got the EIP. But I’m supposed to believe the Negotiation Team didn’t have anything to do with it. Then why the hell don’t the WTPU have the EIP.

shuper's email:

RGOOD OF THE UNION 9 MARCH 2006 -REV
BY DONALD SHUPER RETIRED ASSOCIATE MEMBER IN GOOD STANDIN G

AS OFFICERS OF THE UNION YOU SHOULD BE VERY CONCERNED THAT YOUR LEADERS HAVE SHOWN NO CONCERN FOR MEMBERS RIGHTS, MEMBERS DUES, OR RESPONSIBILITY TO FOLLOW FEDERAL LAW. THIS ISSUE AND HOW IT WAS HANDLED/HIDDEN IS BUT ONE EXAMPLE

I filed serious charges [REF A ] relating to financial malfeasance [CESO- $20,000 TO $200,000] and other violations of SPEEA Governing documents on DEC 19, 2005. The immediate response by Mr McCarty was an abuse of his position and an abuse of the Boeing e-mail system. As he and your leaders have known,

I filed a complaint about his actions and that of Charles Bofferding
with Boeing Ethics, and have confirmed Boeing IS investigating..

On Jan 16, a still secret hearing board was convened, and charges were dismissed. [ REF B ] The board, its formation, its meeting, and the results ALL violate federal law [Ref D ].

All members were not notified, and neither side had a fair hearing for example.
Regular members have unquestioned standing to file and reqeuest enforcement by the DOL. Non regular members musty first overcome the improper Governing Documents

ITS YOUR UNION- YOUR MONEY - DEMAND ACCOUNTIBILITY .

REF A: Charges found at http://home.att.net/~amember/ChargesFiled19DecR.pdf
Tom McCarty widely published on Dec 22 "."Why is it necessary to defend ourselves against the ravings of a confused and bitter person " Charles Bofferding widely published on Dec 22 ""Why do you let him waste our time like this when we have important things to do?"

REF B: http://home.att.net/~amember/sp06_017charges.pdf - Secret Hearing Board results
. . . The Board considered the testimony of the SPEEA Governing Documents Committee Chair who stated that the most recent referendum revisions to the Constitution had NOT[ocr typo] Error intended to allow for anyone other than Regular Members to bring charges.

. . . Based on this input and our interpretation of the SPEEA governing documents, the Hearing Board unanimously finds that Mr. Shuper does NOT have standing to file charges against SPEEA members and officers. All charges are dismissed.

Signed this day, January 16th, 2006. Alan Rice Hearing Board Chair
REF C: http://tinyurl.com/jbdxt is LMRDA See section 101(2) FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND ASSEMBLY. REF D: http://tinyurl.com/fnv7s is 29CFR417.2

(1) A reasonable opportunity is afforded for filing charges of serious misconduct against any elected
officer(s) without being subject to retaliatory threats, coercion, or acts of
intimidation.

(2) The charges of serious misconduct are communicated to the accused officer(s), and reasonable
notice is given the members of the organization, reasonably in advance of the time for hearing thereon. REF D1: 417.3 Initiation of proceedings.

[DonShuper]

read thism and file charges or simply notify DOL that SPEEA does NOT have a reasonable process to bring charges - or recall officers.
IOW IF a regular member believes that SPEEA cannot or will not follow the law - the DOL SHALL investigate.

§ 417.1 Purpose and scope.

Section 401(h) of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 (29 U.S.C. 481) provides that if, upon application of any member of a local labor organization, the Secretary of Labor finds, after hearing in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act, that the constitution and bylaws of such labor organization do not provide an adequate procedure for the removal of an elected officer guilty of serious misconduct, such officer may be removed for cause shown and after notice and hearing, by the members in good standing voting in a secret ballot.
------
§ 417.3 Initiation of proceedings.

top
(a) Any member of a local labor organization who has reason to believe that:

(1) An elected officer(s) of such organization has been guilty of serious misconduct, and

(2) The constitution and bylaws of his organization do not provide an adequate procedure for the removal of such officer(s), may file with the Office of Labor-Management Standards a written application, which may be in the form of a letter, for initiation of proceedings under section 401(h) of the Act.

(b) An application filed under paragraph (a) of this section shall set forth the facts upon which it is based including a statement of the basis for the charge that an elected officer(s) is guilty of serious misconduct; and shall contain:

(1) Information identifying the labor organization and the officer or officers involved, and

(2) Any data such member desires the Office of Labor-Management Standards to consider in connection with his application.

§ 417.4 Pre-hearing conference.

top
(a) Upon receipt of an application filed under §417.3, the Chief, DOE shall cause an investigation to be conducted of the allegations contained therein, and if he finds probable cause to believe that the constitution and bylaws of the labor organization do not provide an adequate procedure for the removal of an elected officer(s) guilty of serious misconduct he shall:

(1) Advise the labor organization of his findings and

(2) Afford such labor organization the opportunity for a conference to be set not earlier than 10 days thereafter except where all interested persons elect to confer at an earlier time. Any such conference shall be conducted for the purpose of hearing the views of interested persons and attempting to achieve a settlement of the issue without formal proceedings.

(b)(1) If:

(i) The labor organization declines the opportunity to confer afforded under paragraph (a) of this section, and fails to undertake compliance with the provisions of section 401(h) of the Act, or if

(ii) After consideration of any views presented by the labor organization the Chief, DOE still finds probable cause to believe that the removal procedures are not adequate and if agreement for the adoption of adequate procedures for removal has not been achieved and the labor organization refuses to enter into a stipulation to comply with the provisions of section 401(h) of the Act, the Chief, DOE shall submit his findings and recommendations to the Assistant Secretary.
----
IOW IF a regular member believes that SPEEA cannot or willnot follow the law - the DOL SHALL investigate.

Again- thanks for letting me bring that out

And be careful when posting salmon pink flyers

[James Hatfield]

They seemed to have a "reasonable process" for removing Mr. Day and Mr. Dunn. I don't think your argument holds much water.

You also say

IOW IF a regular member believes that SPEEA cannot or willnot follow the law - the DOL SHALL investigate.

But what if all the regular members don't care and no one reports it to the DOL, how does the DOL know to investigate? Do they have a random drawing each year of unions they are going to investigate for fun?

[James Hatfield]

Aren't you worried that PETA is going to come to your door and tell you to stop denegrating rats on a bulletin board?

[DonShuper]

5@34 830PM SAT 11 MARCH
==
.

They seemed to have a "reasonable process" for removing Mr. Day and Mr. Dunn. I don't think your argument holds much water

As chair of the Governing documents committee, of all persons, you should at least have a grasp of a few basics

1) Just because no one has filed a complaint with DOL on either the past election, or for that matter the current election does not mean that SPEEA has or is following the appropriate governing documents e.g CFR Code of federal regulations. Thats about as brilliant as mcCarty saying that since the IRS has not complained for 20 years, there is no problem.

2) At the minimum- you and the committee need a simple course in parlimentary procedure [roberts rules of order ] and at least acknowledgement of Federal law- specifically federal labor law. For example, greg junemann used LMRDA to shoot down the alan rice fiasco - and it was obvious that hyllis was clueless or just following Charlies orders.

3) I'bve provided links to the appropriate federal codes 29CFR417 covering the REQUIREMENTS for REMOVAL/RECALL of elected union officers -which can be enforced by the DOL if any member complains. And it so happens that that particular set of laws is NOT time limited- and need only a complaint by a member stating why he/she beleives the union documents or procedures are not adequate.

4) mike dunn and tom day were unaware of that particular section of code - and the local DOL had never had a similar complaint. Its rarely used, simply because few members and few legal staff even know of its existance. In the case of Dunn and Day- the automatic default was/is that non- regular elections are not covered- and the question of proper/adequate procedures probably never came up.

5) IF a regular member makes such a complaint - the DOL is REQUIRED TO INVESTIGATE and determine if the complaint is valid- and if the member in accordance with the THEN PUBLISHED GOVERNING DOCUMENTS has standing to file.

6) DOL can only get involed on what is called titile IV issues- title I which covers member defintitions can only be enforced by the member in federal court- and you can be sure your corrupt SPEEA legal team knows that.

7) Like others - you claim its my intrepretation- simply because you are either too damm lazy, or unable to understand simple concepts clearly spelled out even after you are directed to the specific site and codes. Or one could simply call the local office of DOL/OLMS an ask about the requiremens of 29CFR417 as to removal of officers... or read fo yourself the details
-- http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text....4.1.9&idno=29 ---

or the tiny url http://tinyurl.com/fnv7s


PART 417—PROCEDURE FOR REMOVAL OF LOCAL LABOR ORGANIZATION OFFICERS

Section Contents

General
§ 417.1 Purpose and scope.
§ 417.2 Definitions.

Subpart A—Procedures To Determine Adequacy of Constitution and Bylaws for Removal of Officers of Local Labor Organizations
§ 417.3 Initiation of proceedings.
§ 417.4 Pre-hearing conference.
§ 417.5 Notice.
§ 417.6 Powers of Administrative Law Judge.


8) Ditto for IRS regulations - or basic lmrda -
--http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/statutes/olms/lmrda-act.htm --

9) As an officer of the union- you and the rest should be ashamed - but as has been said - one cannot shame the shameless - so be happy and stay in denial !

10) as to how the DOL knows to investigate/ simple - it only takes a member with integrity and cojones to call and ask- and then file a writeen complaint -at least on the above issue. other issues are similar- but for most - DOL is prohibited by law from getting involved- embezzlement excepted

[Tin Basher2]

My thought was I am skeptical that everything needs to be changed. We got a great contract and finally the EIP. Sure we can always work harder and make things even better but that's what everybody says when they're running for office.

You guys are spreading it pretty thick. Now you want us to believe that when Mike's house lands on the wicked witch all the Munchkins will be free!

Pul-eeze life is tough enough but it's a lot tougher when you're stupid.

What the president needs to do is exhibit some leadership and help the organization move forward. The members will decide if and when that happens.

[14SPEEA]

Ok So Tinbasher, your not saying Mike and crew are all bad, and yet you seem to hint thye want to change everything. I don't read that in info on website or in mailings.

I have seen salmon flyers in everett.....tjose sure are sick. Someone up there has too much time on their hands and I personally hope gets caught red handed put them up in defiance of Federal Law, Boeing rules and SPEEA rules.

Sure would be nice if they were denounced yet silence says it all


As for house and munchkins.......A more apt fable would be trolls under bridges.


SPEEA has enough hot air at it's halls.

[DonShuper]

but inflated egos .

Unfortunately - IMO - unless the MEMBERS stand up and get rid of the incumbents on this election- you are unlikely to have another chance. I'e looked at probalby 30 to 50 cases of corrupt union officals - and fraudlent elections- and knowing flaluntin g of federal laws, etc. It is verey rare for a member to be able to timely hold the incumbents accountable - it takes a half dozen years by which time its moot.


democracy is hard work - and to maintain it - one must first understand it .

the current SPEEA governign documents ae in a mess - the major downhill trend started in early 2000- when many rights and reasonable/legal portions of the constitution were gutted in the 2000 version.

http://www.speea.org/contact/files/Constitution_99.html

and look at the proper way to define member(s) voting rights - executive board members at large - [ regional elections for e-board members are a violation of CFR452 ]- , etc.
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text...o=29;cc=e cfr

§ 452.19 Executive functions.
§ 452.26 Elections in local labor organizations.
Local labor organizations must conduct their regular elections of officers by secret ballot among the members in good standing. All members in good standing of the local labor organization must be given an opportunity to vote directly for candidates to fill the offices that serve them. Indirect election of officers of a local labor organization would violate section 401(b) of the Act. For example, a procedure whereby the local's membership elects an executive board or some similar body by secret ballot which in turn selects (either from among its own membership or from the local's membership at large) the persons to fill specific offices would not comply with the Act. 21 Similarly, the election of a chief steward by the shop stewards would violate the Act if the chief steward, by virtue of that position, also serves as a member of the executive board, since members of the executive board must be elected directly by secret ballot among the members in good standing.


Unless and until you take back control FROM the ecxecutive director who currently has effectively exclusive authority over the staff - given to him by secret contract in 1999-2000, and forbid him from signing on to the personal contract of the general counsel - the members will never regain control !

From craig buckham jan 2006

The 990 is not as detailed regarding kinds of disbursements and
reimbursements. Remember, the purpose of the 990 is to establish the tax
standing - not to duplicate the LM-2 disclosures. There is nothing in
the 990 that misrepresents any fact relating to the tax standing. I see
no real problem with it. I do think it is an improvement to have the
President sign it, and to have the numbers line up, and I concur with
the Board's recent implementation of those changes.

Phyllis' contract was with and signed by the Board. Charles did sign the
contract along with the President, in part because the contract had
required some duties of him. I do not know the standing of the current
contract.

Point here is that crag did not and still does not know what a 990 form is- and neither did tom or the e-board . Why not - cuz charlie refused to show it to them !

to continue - keeping in mind that the L&PA Kommittee NEVER did agree to NOT file CVD [countervailing duty petition] nor did the Counicl or e-board make such a decision in 2002. That was solely the dealings of Charlie-pat- Rudy deleon- and helped by ...Craig... before he lost... more from craig in jan this year . .

Regarding Forms 990, failure shmailure - no harm no foul. The t's and
i's are now being correctly crossed and dotted, so the issue is moot.
There is no sane reason to waste any more energy on it, I will discuss
it no further.

You seem to be saying that "Charlie sold us out" on the CVD issue. Did
he receive some compensation? If so, that would indeed be a surprise to
me. Did he talk with Rudy? Yes, I was aware of his having discussed the
issue. Charlie and I discussed this at some length at the time; some of
these discussions were in the presence of Pat & Kristin; some was
before, during and after the special meeting with Rudy. We, SPEEA, did
what we thought was best at the time. If you are privy to any more info,
please let me know. The vague "more people than you realize ..." wording
is not at all helpful.

And guess who 'approved' without council approval the increase in dues to CESO ??
from craig . . .

I approved the CESO financial arrangements. I think that changing the
CESO governing document to allow an institution to contribute more than
50% of the total was the responsible and appropriate course. I believe
that our participation is a good value for our members. The SPEEA
leaders have made adjustments since then; that also is fine with me.

Wrt your shareholder proposal, it had no chance of passing, you knew it,
we knew it, and everybody at the shareholders meeting knew it. What sort
of SPEEA resource did you expect us to commit to it? We liked it and
told you so. It would have been imprudent to do more.

OK folks - I'v made my points - shown you where the major downturn and loss of control started..... do you want more of the same ? You do ? simply sit back - vote for the incumbents and alan rice - and if you think you got hosed this time in negotiations - be prepared to BOHICA in 08...
From craig this year

. . .You wonder why you do not get anywhere by spewing
venom? Because nobody likes a snake. . . .

Hmmmm- snakes do eat rats !

I'll be out of com till Sat - meanwhile - VOTE - and in king county vote early and often - especially if you vote for the incumbents since any kind of illegal and fraud schemes seem to be consistent with their past record and assets.

Those who profess to favor freedom, yet deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without planting up the ground. They want rain without thunder or lightening. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters. The struggle may not be a moral one; or it may be a physical one; or it may be both moral and physical; but it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did, and it never will."

-- Frederick Douglas, Abolitionist

[ipscone]

So, Don, what's your _specific_ complaint about SPEEA's recall process?

While I completely disagree with the travesty pulled on Dunn and Day, it shows the ease with which someone can be recalled.

I think there is no merit to Don's complaint, with regards to removing members.

[James Hatfield]

Tin -
You must not work for Boeing because when I worked for Boeing, they told us

IF YOU DON'T LIKE CHANGE, YOU NEED TO FIND SOMEPLACE ELSE TO WORK

Mr. Dunn wasn't the only candidate looking for inprovement. For example, both Mr. Dunn and Ms. Cole wanted to get more members involved - which will make us a stronger union. Those are improvements that I can support. Should I also avoid voting for Ms. Cole because she might change the union?

The only reason I was talking about Mr. Dunn at the end of my post was to be fair. We were discussing a tough spot in the road for SPEEA and I didn't want to paint Mr. Dunn as a bad person. At least he and all the other candidates have the gumption to run for an E-board officer position.

But I do agree with you that if you want to be SPEEA President, you have to show some Leadership qualities. But what qualities are needed to make a good leader differs from person to person.