Jesse J. Averhart Mary R.Walker
23 North Lenape Avenue 333 West State Street, Apt. 10-L
Trenton, NJ 08618 Trenton, NJ 08618
609.865.5431 609.433.3950
April 18, 2010
Hello Jeff:
Members for Change (MFC) welcomes your invitation to speak out about the
“…negative relationship between big spending unions and their members who foot
the bill.” http://www.cwalocal1033membersforchange.org/
http://www.cwalocal1033membersforchange.org/blog/
MFC are members of Communications Workers of America (CWA), Local 1033, under
the (sic) leadership of Rae Roeder, President for the past 15 years. Note: 1033 is a
public employees only Local.
First a little backdrop. According to a January 10, 2010 U.S. Department of Labor,
Bureau of Labor Statistics Report, In 1982 the union membership rate was 20.1%.
of the U.S. workforce. It has since plummeted to 12.3% in 2009, down from 12.4%
in 2008.
Compellingly, “[m]ore public sector employees (7.9 million) belonged to a union
than did private sector employees (7.4 million), despite there being 5 times more
wage and salary workers in the private sector.” http://www.bls.gov/news.
release/union2.nr0.htm
Another unit of the Department of Labor is the Office of Labor-Management
Standards (OLMS) which administers and enforces provisions of the Labor-
Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 (LMRDA). The LMRDA primarily
promotes union democracy and financial integrity in private sector labor unions by
setting standards for union officer elections, union trusteeships and with regard to
safeguards for union assets. The LMRDA promotes labor union and labor-
management transparency through reporting and disclosure requirements for labor
unions (and their officials), which are maintained online as public information. http:
//www.dol.gov/olms/
See LMRDA Enforcement Actions of those locals which represent private sector
employees for a glimpse of the magnitude of corruption. http://www.dol.
gov/olms/regs/compliance/enforcement_1.htm
Conversely, public sector local unions that do not represent private sector workers
do not fall under the strict scrutiny of the OLMS. Only 13 states have enacted
public worker right to know legislation. With the proper exposure, we hope to make
New Jersey the 14th. http://www.effwa.org/files/pdf/Washington%20Worker%
20Right-To-Know%20Briefing%20Packet.pdf See model legislation at the end of
this report.
Under the leadership of Rae Roeder there has been: no organizing in 15 years; no
financial disclosure of how members’ dues are spent; no secret ballot voting for
union officers. Elections are conducted in-house, by staff - and notably, workers
taken off the job specifically for this task.
Organizing is purportedly one of the cornerstones of this Union. However, as noted,
Roeder has not organized one member in 15 years. Ironically, the Roeder
administration has reported spending over 4 million dollars of members’ dues
during this period for organizing. Are these funds being laundered by this local and
funneled out into the political arena?
An example of Roeder’s arrogance with spending members’ dues was when she
hired Sandy Coia, a co-worker at the Department of Education, after Coia was
terminated from the department for stealing $21.230. Coia was paid at her state
salary and racked up thousands in overtime to pay counsel to cut a deal for her to
avoid jail time. Coia did not receive a jail sentence. To date she continues to amass
huge sums in overtime of members dues to pay for ongoing run-ins with the law.
She cannot represent state employees. The question is what does she do to
warrant her salary? http://www.nj.gov/oag/dcj/releases/2005/coia_0823.htm
Roeder blatantly refuses to provide to the membership an itemization of how any of
the members’ dues are spent. Instead, she relies upon a generalized audit report. In
stark contrast to 1033, Locals which represent private sector workers provide
these annual audit reports and comprehensive financial disclosures for public
scrutiny. http://www.dol.gov/olms/regs/compliance/rrlo/lmrda.htm
See also Local 1034 financial report. http://kcerds.dol-esa.gov/query/orgReport.do
Roeder is entrenched at Local 1033 as there is no oversight to ensure a secret
ballot election. The result:
• A Local employee with a vested interest under Roeder as the Election
Chairman, who does what he is told;
• Ballots are printed by a company with a vested interest to maintain the status
quo;
• Ballots are maintained at the Local in a (sic) secure, vertical filing cabinet
prior to mailing. This filing cabinet is also the source of replacement ballots.
• Ballots are accessible by Roeder after the election, see next bullet;
• In 2005 this printer (sic) in error printed identifying/serial numbers on the
ballots. Combining the three latter bullets provides the basic technique of a vote
rigger, noting names of people who never seem to vote and whose votes are
stolen, resulting in an unprecedented surge in voting for Roeder in 2005 and 2008;
• The Election Committee Co-Chairperson - with a key to ballot secured areas -
was abruptly taken off the Election committee in the midst of the campaign in 2005
to run for Vice-President of the Local, which is strictly prohibited by the by-laws. Is
it possible she had the key copied?
• The Post Office ‘selected’ to receive the ballots was approximately 35 miles
from the Local, where members could not observe comings and goings;
• Returning and undeliverable ballots were maintained in one P.O Box requiring
daily access and tampering, when the return ballot P.O. Box should have been
accessed only once, when ballots were picked up for counting.
• During the 2008 election, members were taken off for state paid leave en
masse for purported contract training---the contract came out 2006---and treated to
free movie tickets...a violation of a basic election tenet---use of union or employer
funds and equipment
The Roeder administration vehemently opposes the election being conducted by a
third party vendor to remove any question regarding the process.
Indeed, every member has the absolute right to the secrecy of his or her vote.
However, if an entrenched incumbent wishes to remain in power, no matter the will
of the membership, the current in-house election practice at CWA Local 1033 is an
invitation to voting fraud.
The National CWA has sustained all of Roeder’s actions by ignoring and/or
suppressing complaints and charges, in order, it appears, to maintain the status
quo at this Local, cloaked from the OLMS.
Indeed, speaking of the fox guarding the henhouse, elected officers of the National
CWA are entrenched until they retire and pass the torch to a chosen successor:
“On February 13, 2009, in the United States District Court for the District of
Columbia, the Department filed
suit against the Communication Workers of America (CWA) (located in
Washington, D.C.). The lawsuit
seeks to set aside the June 23, 2008, election for the offices of District 1 Vice
President, District 3 Vice President, District 7 Vice President, and
District 9 Vice President and seeks a new election for those offices under
OLMS supervision. The complaint alleges that CWA violated the LMRDA when it
failed to conduct its election in accordance with its Constitution which
requires the election to be conducted by secret ballot vote at a convention of
delegates. The complaint also alleges that CWA failed to provide adequate
safeguards to insure a fair election when the union provided ballots that were
not secret and when observers were unable to observe the counting of
ballots.”
http://www.dol.gov/olms/regs/compliance/civil_actions.htm
Roeder parrots these final actions by the National as vindication of her actions.
However, see the number of civil actions OLMS enforced after the parent union
review; civil actions unavailable to this local.
MFC would be ecstatic to come forward with evidence and tell our story. We are
anxious to bring this corruption and abuse into the open, where the facts will
speak for themselves.
We look forward to hearing from you at your earliest possible convenience.
/s/ Jesse J. Averhart /s/ Mary R. Walker
Jesse J. Averhart Mary R. Walker