November 19, 2010

Supervisor, Vice President Frank Spencer (by email)

New York City District Council of Carpenters
395 Hudson Street
New York, NY 10014

Dear Mr. Spencer:

I write to bring to your attention the conduct and actions of the Local 157 executive board over the past
few months. Specifically, the executive board has used misinformation, fear, scare tactics, deceit,
trickery, violated the UBC Constitution, violated Robert's Rules of Order, and trampled on the rights of
the membership in an attempt to win debates, divide the membership and impose their will.

The executive board decisions are antithetical to the goals you have outlined with respect to, "Having a
more open and transparent union that promotes communication, inclusion and paves the way for a new
era, building a better district council by taking the highest moral ground, representing the best interest
of union carpenters, and ensuring our union operates in a manner that is ethical.”

It is quite obvious the executive board actions are contrary to your vision of reform. They have not
demonstrated the slightest interest or commitment to reform, any independence of thought and continue
to operate like the events of the past 15 months never happened, its "business as usual."
What is even more troubling is that in addition to being President of Local 157, you appointed
Lawrence D'Errico, Director of Operations, the highest leadership position in the District Council.
D'Errico has shown utter contempt for the membership of this union, has violated members rights,
violated the UBC Constitution and abused his authority when conducting meetings.

At our regular scheduled meetings held on October 15th and November 15th, the executive board twice
voted no to a request for members to receive a copy of the meeting minutes and an open microphone
put in place in-order to better understand speakers clearly and accurately.

At the October 15, meeting the executive board mislead the membership, used fear and scare tactics to
win a debate on a motion for a copy of the meeting minutes. (see local157.blogspot.com/2010/10/e-
board-votes-no-minutes-no-mic.html)

The executive board falsely implied, the "Obligation" in the UBC Constitution prohibits a member
from having a copy of the minutes because he or she might violate the "Obligation" and risk being
brought up on charges by revealing the “business of the Brotherhood.”

This amounted to defrauding the membership, since this is a gross misinterpretation of the UBC
Constitution. The executive board in essence scared the membership into submission and the motion
for the minutes was defeated.
At the November 15th, meeting, the membership passed a motion for a microphone despite the boards
two previous decision denying a request. Sensing the frustration of members during debate, the board
dare not speak against the motion and refrained from their usual scare tactics.

By voting against the microphone, the executive board has demonstrated they are not interested in what
the members have to say, not interested in "promoting communication" and their actions are pathetic.
There was also a new motion made at the November meeting for a copy of the meeting minutes, the
wording of the motion was more precise, taking into consideration the concerns of the executive board.

The following two motions might seem similar, but they aren't:

October motion: "I move that a copy of the previous months meeting minutes be distributed to each
member before the start of each meeting."

November motion: "I move that a copy of the previous months meeting minutes be distributed to each
member before the start of each meeting with the understanding that members would be obliged not to
reveal the protected contents to someone outside the Brotherhood."

There is a big difference between the two motions, the first motion has no restrictions regarding the
minutes. The second motion has restrictions.

I made the new motion which received a second and President D'Errico did not accept the motion.

D'Errico stated "I think what you want, is to make a motion to reconsider." Disagreeing I stated "no,
this is a new motion." D'Errico replied, "It’s the same motion and it should be stated as a "motion to
reconsider" and asked that I make the motion after the officer reports and during the good of the order."

Giving D'Errico the benefit of doubt and assuming his intentions are honest and ethical, I foolishly
agreed to the Chairs request.

With the consent of the Chair, I made the "motion to reconsider."

D'Ericco stated "the motion is properly worded" and asked for a second. D'Errico questioned the
members how they voted on the decided motion from the previous month, one by one members were
being rejected because they did not vote with the prevailing side.

Rule 31 in the UBC Constitution states "A motion to reconsider must be made and seconded by two
members who voted with the prevailing side."

D'Errico's deceit, trickery and ill-advised predetermine plan had become clear; he intentionally led me
into a trap, not accepting the newly worded motion and have me make a "motion to reconsider."

D'Errico is not acting with good intentions, and his devious plan is in violation of the UBC
Constitution, Roberts Rules of Order and members rights.

Assuming for a moment D'Errico's interpretation of my "new motion" is correct as being the same as
the motion already adopted, his instructions to make a "motion to reconsider" is in violation of Rule 31,
since I did not vote with the prevailing side.

If D'Errico was acting as a fair and impartial Chair and ruled the new motion the same as the motion
adopted, he should have ruled the "new motion" out of order, and instructed that only a member who
voted on the prevailing side can make a "motion to reconsider." I would then have the option to appeal
the decision of the Chair.

He could have further instructed that if I wanted the motion to be reconsidered, I can make a brief
statement for reconsidering the motion during the good of the order. This way if a member who voted
on the prevailing side agrees with my reasons, he or she will make the "motion to reconsider."

But D'Errico was not acting as a fair and impartial Chair, he had an ill-advised predetermine plan that
included hindering the rights of the members.

When D'Errio's plan became clear, I raised a point of order, stating the Chair "intentionally misled and
used trickery suggesting the "motion to reconsider" which should have been ruled out of order.

I appeal the decision which received a second, and D'Errico ruled his decision stands and denied the
appeal, violating Rule 17 of the UBC Constitution.

In a denying the appeal and following his ill-advised predetermine plan, D'Errico acting as the
presiding office, violated the Constitution, Roberts Rules of Order and the rights of the assembly.

D'Errico committed the following constitutional offenses:

 Violation of Rule 31 by giving false instructions to make a "motion to reconsider."

 Violation of Rule 31 by accepting a "motion to reconsider"
 Violation of Rule 17 by denying an appeal and refusing to relinquishing the Chair to the Vice
President and stating the appeal to the meeting in these words: "Shall the decision of the Chair
be sustained as the decision of the Union?"
 Violation of Section 51 (6) Defrauding the Brotherhood by misleading the membership and
failing to enforce the constitution.
 Violation of Section 51 (13) Violating the Obligation by failing the oath to execute the duties of
his office and to the best of his ability, preserve protect and defend the UBC Constitution.

The fact that D’Errico brazenly committed these offenses while Review Officer, Dennis Walsh was in
attendance suggests that he thinks his conduct is entirely appropriate.

D'Errico's conduct is entirely inappropriate and he has demonstrated that he is unfit and entirely the
wrong person to hold the position of Director of Operations.

D'Errico has shown himself to be a dictator and not a facilitator when presiding over meetings. He has
demonstrated a pattern of rule-breaking, including misusing his authority by intentionally hindering the
rights of the members, and not acting neutral when presiding over meetings.

It is not the microphone or meeting minutes at issue here, its the rights of the members continuing to be
infringed upon by a select few, who are in positions of authority.

In light of the corruption and conviction of Michael Forde and others, carpenters have been abused in
the most egregious ways over a 10-year period. If our union is to survive and overcome corruption,
court orders and monitoring, it's vitally important that leaders be held not to the lowest standard, but to
a higher standard. It's also vitally important that members have full faith in the integrity of their leaders.

The executive boards conduct especially D'Errico's, is what make members cynical about their union.
It's the cavalier attitude of leaders towards the rights of members that fuel this cynicism.
What is ironic is that members’ rights are continuing to be abused by a Michael Forde hold-over, and
today Forde faces up to 11 years in prison when he’s sentenced for selling out the rank and file for his
own enrichment.

Employees of the District Council and elected leaders don't believe they work for the members. They
know we work for them. We are the suckers and many members feel powerless to affect any change in
their union.

The executive board recently stated "they would like more members to attend meetings" is laughable
given how they conduct themselves towards the membership.

Leaders are there to serve the membership, above all, we must root out all the bad ones until all the
people in those jobs and positions know they work for the members.

When that message becomes clear maybe our union can move forward to a brighter future.

Wherefore, Lawrence D'Errico, by such conduct, warrants at a minimum a reprimand with an apology
to the membership of local 157, and at a maximum trial, and possible removal from office and
disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the UBC Constitution.

I await your reply. Thanking you in advance for your cooperation regarding this matter.

Sincerely,

John Musumeci (jmusumeci157@gmail.com)

cc: Review Officer, Dennis Walsh, (by email)

Inspector General, Scott Dainelson (by email)
Trial Chair, Walter Mack (by email)
Recording Secretary Mitch Sonntag (by fax)