Banner - District One History


  1. Proceeding Of 47th Convention
  2. Delegate List
  3. Highlights of the 47th Convention - Secretaries Report
  4. Recommendations Of The District Secretary
  5. Report Of Committees
  6. Unfinished & New Business
  7. Election Of Officers


Held at the Bally's Hotel
Reno, Nevada
Saturday, August 6, 1988

         The meeting was called to order at 10:09 A.M., by Secretary/Treasurer Thomas Watters, Jr. He offered a welcomed to all in addendance and mentioned the fact that all people seated were credentailed delegates and guests. Roll Call and tabulation will be taken at the ruled order of business. He, then, introduce the appointed Chairman and Presiding Offices for this 47th Convention: International Vice President Nick Long.

         Chairman Long welcomed all Delegates and guests assembled here today and mentioned he was honored to preside over this 47th District Number One Convention.

         Chairman Long appointed the following temporary Convention Officers: Sergeant at Arms: Floyd E. Hart--Local 15. Assistant to the Secretary: Larry Price--Local 154.

         The next order of business was roll call and tabulation of votes and guests. Below is the list of Delegates to the 47th District No. One Convention:

Back to Top of Page

Delegate List

Delegate Name
Local # City & State
Floyd E. Hart, Jr. 15 Seattle, Washington
Paul Bryan 15 Seattle, Washington
Peter Alward 28 Portland, Oregon
John R. DiSciullo 28 Portland, Oregon
No Delegate 91 Boise, Idaho
Pat Devereaux 93 Spokane, Washington
John Stanovich 117 Bellingham, Washington
Larry Price 154 Seattle, Washington
Thomas Watters, Jr. 154 Seattle, Washington
No Delegate 159 Portland, Oregon
Glenn Gilbert 175 Tacoma, Washington
No Delegate 240 Billings, Montana
Irvin Renz 339 Missoula, Montana
No Delegate 672 Klamath-Medford, Oregon
Elizabeth Rosenblatt 675 Eugene, Oregon
Grace Friedli 887 Seattle, Washington
Denice Jewell 918 Anchorage, Alaska

Back to Top of Page

Highlights Of The 47th District Convention
Report Of The District Secretary

         This is the 47th Convention of District #1 within our Alliance. This report will cover events, position and financial standing of this District that pertains to my duties and obligations these past two years.

         District #1 presently comprises fourteen local unions in the five northwestern United States. We have a Per Capita membership of 560 and a Death Benefit Fund enrollment of 600, and that's as close as I can pin it down. I could be five or ten percent off one way or another.

         Communications received were copied, reported and forwarded to all local unions of this District. With the exception of per them payments to delegates at this Convention, all bills are paid to date. That's an untrue statement. Other bills to pay, as small as they might be: we had to buy some tapes and the coffee and rolls, if you approve it, and I think the auditor and I got a couple of small bills, maybe in the $20.00 range for additional copies I had to make up before I came to the Convention, for your information. Death benefits are paid to beneficiaries to date with the last paid number 683. That is exactly what the Locals have been billed for as of this date.

         The cost of printing two Newsletters since the last Convention including postal permits, fees and stamps $748.65.

         The cost of printing and mailing the Convention proceedings of 1986 was less than $100.00. That's as close as I can get it because, as I just mentioned, there are still a few bills to pay but it was under $100.00.

         Since the last Convention in 1986, we have seen Local 94 Butte, Montana amalgamate with Local 339 of Missoula, Montana. Local 254 of Yakima, Washington has gone Out of existence. Local 180 of Everett, Washington has joined with Local 154 of the Seattle-Bremerton area.

         One new local has been formed in Boise, Idaho. This event took place about the time of our 46th Convention in 1986. To date they have not affiliated with this District. Letters have been sent them and the I.A. General Offices have been notified.

         Since our last Convention we are down about 50 members on the per capita roster and about 40 members less in the District Death Benefit Fund. This matter will be addressed later in this report and in the Secretary Recommendations portion.

         Referring to the District Secretary report from our 46th Convention in 1986, there was mention of the Department of Labor requesting an audit of the Books and Records of this District. This was completed following the last Convention. Please refer to the list Of Communication copies under date of 18 September 1986 from the DOL. The letter is self-explanatory and resulted in an increase of Bonding coverage and two cosmetic changes in the report format.

         There was an additional cost to the District the past two year s. If you will refer to the General Fund Balance Sheet 12/31/85 through 12/31/86 you will note an income of some $3451.00 and expenditures of over $4000.00. Over $1000.00 was Convention and delegate per diem. Added to this was about $670.00 for letters, postage expenses for special mailing to each and every member of local unions of District #1. This was in regard to the big push the anti-union exhibitors (Moyer included) to change the reading the Motion Picture Exhibitor Bidding Law in the northwest states. That letter copy is included in the 1986 Convention Proceedings. Out of the cost of something less than $670.00, I could qualify using the $142.99 that had been in the Legislative Fund for the Legislative Fund for the state of Washington. Further, I was able to acquire about $200.00 from Local 154. This leaves a cost to the District general fund of about $325.00. 1 will elaborate no further on this subject, but am prepared to answer any questions on the matter at this Convention.

         Let us now move to the financial standing of this District. Please note the General Fund balance sheet 1.2/31/85 - 12/31/86. That was the year of the Convention and with all bills paid we-had an ending balance of $3238.77. A year later 12/31/87 we showed a balance of $4144.66. There is an untrue statement as far as the information you have, but that will be corrected when I hand out the audit reports. I couldn't get the balance sheet to balance with that figure of $4144.66 till I found out where the error was. I will go into that later. So this part of it is true, but not true with the information you have. Recap of the seven months to date reflects a balance of $4716.45. That is not true, it is $4660 something I think it shows in there. Again this was done before I was able to tabulate this formal cents. Arrearages to this District for the second quarter per capita Would add another $229.00. Some of this has been corrected to date. Please note that the third quarter is now due, but not yet billed. For the sake of the delegates who have not followed the progress of this District, let me state that when taking over, as District Secretary in August Of 1982 there was $700.00 in the General Fund. This of course was a low figure following a Convention, after all Convention Bills and Delegate expenses were paid. It looks like I Put that in to show what a magnificent job we done in the past six years. A, because you have to understand that when I took this over there was $700.00 and there was a tremendous amount of checks that had not been deposited, so going over the past records of the District, after a Convention we are lucky to have over a $1000.00 in the General Fund. It just shows that we have climbed, but of course we did raised the per-capita six years ago too.

         Now let us look at the Insurance Fund. If you will look at the Insurance Fund balance sheet 12/31/85 - 12/31/86 you will find an ending balance of $96,098.01 between our checking account (MMA) and one CD. A year later from the Balance Sheet of 12/31/86 - 12/31/87 we find a balance of $99,2278.54. If you add to that balance 12/31/87, estimated interest and income for the seven months of this year we would reflect a balance of $100,6-39.11. As Of this writing we have one NSF check and arrearages through DA 683 of $2740.00. Again, part of this has been corrected. If this were brought to date we would show an Insurance Fund balance of 103,379.11. Again, let me compare a time frame of Our Insurance Fund from 12/31/82 going into 1983 we had a CD worth $42,815.87 and two liquid accounts totaling $210,397.00. This produced a grand total in the Insurance Fund of $63,213.46. So in less that six years we are now over the $100,000.00 mark. Keep in mind that the two accounts that we now have, one is a CD, the interest has never been touched on that, plus last Convention we transferred money out of the checking account, (our money market account) and put it in the CD so it would bring it up to a even figure of $75,000.00. The idea on this was so the greater amount of interest would stay there and not be touched, because we are deficit spending and we are going into the principle on our so called checking account or money market account.

         Let us now address the District #1 Death Benefit Fund (Insurance Fund). This is the biggie and this is going to take some thinking through this Convention, I think. Briefly, the history of this plan dates back to a District Convention in 1940 when it was adopted and approved and effected. It went into practical being in 1941 and at the Convention in 1942 it Was unanimously endorsed that it remain in existence and not removed except by a referendum vote of all participants. Now that's a pretty general statement and read that in the history of proceedings and take that for what ever it's worth. It began with a 40 cents per member assessment and a $300.00 benefit. Today, 47 years later, we have a $2.00 assessment and a $1500.00 benefit. For some strange reason this has increased in both assessment and benefit five times. These facts may prove nothing, but may have some bearing on our future direction for this Fund.

         As mentioned in past reports there are many options open to us for its continuation. Let us explore these at this time. Keep in mind these are general calculations. I had to start with some kind of a figure and carry on.

         Financial Statements:.

         1. We can continue the $2.00 assessment and the $1500.00 benefit. With the number of participants at the present time, this rolls us in a deficit spending mode of some $4000.00 a year. Interest on the monies in the Insurance Fund produces between $6000.00 and $7000.00 per year. Although deficit spending, we are still able to increase our net worth. It, of course, is at a slow rate. We can assume then, that we could continue as we are doing indefinitely. That might not be a true statement for a good length of time anyway.

         2. This option could probably consist of two parts. Let us consider the $2.00 assessment and decrease the benefit to about $1300.00 more or less. The other part would be to increase the assessment to maybe $2.50 and maintain the benefit at $1500.00 or even increase it a bit higher to $1600.00 or so. Both parts of this option would enable us to achieve that goal of a self-sustaining Fund because our net worth would increase at a faster rate.

         3. Although this #3 is not an option at this time, let us elaborate on the self sustaining Fund idea. The self sustaining Fund is one that would enable us to pay benefits from the interest earned and leave the principal amount untouched. Figures for calculation at this time have been based on 600 members paying a $2.00 assessment and an average death toll of 15 per year. The annual death toll average was derived from the total of deaths 1982 through 1987 which was 84 divided by 6 years. It actually figures out to an average of 14. Without going into a long dissertation of facts and figures we could possibly not even consider this self sustaining Fund with anything less than an CD (or equivalent) of the principal amount of anything less than $250,000.00 at 7% and, being practical and fiduciary, closer to $300,0(0.00 at that interest rate.

         Then, in my opinion, we have ourselves a whole new group of problems with the so-called self-sustaining Fund. The problems appear to be of the multiple: fairness, equity, justice, investment, and longevity. There may be other words that could better describe the outcome of feelings when such a plan was implemented. Questions like, the person who had been paying into this Fund for a length of time, 10 years, 20 years, 3C) years, 40 years. The investment is there and the assessments stop. Are all participants equal and receive the same benefit? If so, what is the fairness compared with the new member enrolled and invests nothing? Perhaps raise the one time enrollment fee--to what--$50.00, $100.00, $2100.00? If not that, then perhaps some kind of sliding scale for the person of twenty years of assessments versus someone who has invested nothing or less. if nothing else, a whole new set of problems will be added just from bookkeeping and record compilation of the many members.

         I realize I am rambling on, appearing to make a complicated situation. But these are just some of the things that come to my mind and I could only imagine what other questions and opinions would be forthcoming. The concept is ideal, but to make it work may be another matter altogether. (If any of you are sitting there wondering what this guy talking about) as I remember getting up here and saying, with working for a self sustaining fund, that's true, but we were looking at fourteen and fifteen percent interest rates in those days, that's the way I was looking at it. You cut that in half being practical. I think it's a goal, and I don't see where it's going to happen in a very short length of time.

         Again, this option #4 could consist of two parts. Let us consider discontinuing the District Death Benefit Fund as we now have it and agree to vest those presently involved. With about 600 members and $100,000.00 net worth it does not take a great mathematician to figure out the principal would take care of less than 100 members even with interest in a ten year span. Of Course we could lower the benefit. Even then you could figure out what it would be and would be somewhat, I think, ridiculously low, figure it out with paper and pencil or calculator, however you do it.

         The other part of this option #4 is addressed to the people who claim they have paid in more to this plan than any benefit received. Again, the mathematics. To date there have been 683 deaths since 1941. The $2.00 assessment has been in effect only some twenty years. Prior to that it was $1.25 and going back to its inception began at 40 cents per member. At one time it was 75 cents or something. So there is no way you can, for the person that first put in to it-that has paid more into it, but of course you're taking an example and figuring out it's not a good investment in that respect. Of course the whole idea, I guess, of this was you were investing a Couple of dollars in case you get run over by a truck tomorrow and at least its going-to take the edge off the burial. In one respect it's not an insurance plan it is just what it says it is, a Death Benefit Fund. Something that is better than nothing.

         So there you have some options for our Death Benefit Fund. Our predecessors were young when they put this plan into effect and must have hoped to build some sort of legacy for those that followed.

         There is no question that in the past 50 years many things have changed. Social programs have increased; people employed in the work place are covered more extensively for sickness and injury with and without labor agreements between Union and Employer. Delegates assembled here today should certainly be aware of the working conditions and advantages of the people you are representing here. Some labor contracts provide and/or some employers provide additional protections for the workers along the line of Health and Welfare programs, sick leave, severance pay, vacations, Pension and IRA contributions. You might agree the working person is reasonably covered for any accident, injury or disaster that may occur. And that covers the working person - while working. That's the key to the whole thing: as long as you're working. Keep in mind, though, there are guidelines and limitations to all these protected program and plan.

         We have in this District a Death Benefit plan that covers all members equally with one assessment rate and one benefit rate. It does not diminish or increase except for all equally and for any age. It does not discriminate against the non-working member versus the working member. There are provisions to retain membership in the Fund upon withdrawing from membership. I guess I might say at this point that my term of District Secretary, small as it may be, is quite gratifying when some of these members, I remember going back a long way, who were what I call fairly young compared at least my age now and the family that's left now when they do die, the notes and letters you get that this payment-this benefit comes in quite handy. True, the person that paid all the money in might never received any benefit directly, but it did take the edge off the sorrow and problems and financial cutbacks at the time of death. Probably that's what they had in mind many years ago. So it really-the question-what can we do with this, do away with it, improve it, keep it the same, diminish it or what. As small as it may be but what's the purpose?

         Taking the plan as it now stands with the $2.00 assessment with an average of 15 deaths a year, we are paying $30.00 a year, $2.50 a month provides a $1500.00 benefit upon death. Not the greatest incentive for the 25-year-old, but as a "pay as you go" plan and to the 60 or 70 year old it appears that it is in a class of worthwhile plus.

         I will end discussion on the District Death Benefit Fund hoping I have covered some options. Please prepare to discuss this thoroughly and inform yourself in order to make some decisions on the future direction of this plan. My decision will be covered in the Recommendations portion.

         Let us take up the topic of our Newsletter. Again, we have a history. Dating back to the 1920's we had a communication system among the various local unions in District #1 that was implemented by means of a Quarterly Bulletin. This was a magazine issue that encompassed information from all the local unions four times a year. This was mailed to all members of the various locals and kept everyone informed of events, conditions and wages throughout our area. I have elaborated on this Subject in previous reports and the information in those Quarterly issues proved successful and pushed the meaning of unity for the working persons to the highest plateau level.

         Over the years information from the various locals of this District diminished to the extent that we had to resort to the Newsletter format. The cost figure for publications and mailing entered into the picture, too. Per capita payments from the locals were never increased to keep pace. Finally, we ended LIP with a newsletter published and mailed on an annual basis. This would not be so bad if we could only get some input from the member unions that comprise this District.

         Going back some twenty years, after the Canadian locals withdrew from District #1, we were left with about 600 members spread out among 22 local unions. Today, we have about the same number of members, but divided into fourteen local unions. The number of local unions has diminished, but not the number of members.

         We are mandated by International Constitution for all local unions to affiliate with the District of their area. Further, we must meet in Convention no less than every two years. Our District Constitution directs us to certain rules and obligations.

         This District, as an entity, is viable and is healthy in a financial sense. We, the members, of the local unions that comprise this District have made this possible from the years of inception to date. But, in my opinion, we individually are standing alone, lacking in communication and cooperation, unable or unwilling to unite ourselves into more meaningful and progressive labor unions. This paragraph is meant as a general statement and should not be taken as an affront to only us assembled here today. We have been witnessing this in our country for the past twenty-five years and it can only be blamed on economic and technical developments combined with the political climate to eliminate, or at least decimate, the middle class working person.

         Finally, I will close this book of knowledge to present my appreciation to all local unions that have cooperated and have met their timely obligations. I have enjoyed my terms of office as District Secretary and hope you are satisfied with the progress and information given you for future planning. But I would not be totally truthful if I were not to mention the fact that this job is very demanding and carries much responsibility and trust. A solid surveillance of finances and records of this District by delegates elected to this Convention, as well as the officers of the various locals that make up this District, should be of highest priority. And I mention that because we have proof positive that within our Alliance, two or three Districts that I know of that are in bad shape just because of the finances. They get a certain sum of money and the records, the record keeping is not kept properly; someplace down the line you get questioned and you can't answer the questions. There have been some problems with people actually taking money. I'll say what Chris told me when I took over this job, that every dime is there, and to my knowledge every dime is here; but it doesn't mean that I don't make mistakes or can't explain something's in. compiling all this, which I will get into when we get further down here. But that is the report of the District Secretary.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: Motion we accept the report.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: I second the motion.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Any discussion on the motion?

DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I think it was a very good report, Sounds a little like a campaign speech, but it was a good report and before, I want to say, I want to say this before we go into any discussion of this Death Benefit Fund. I was one of the guys that got it started, I worked on it when it first started and at the time we started it was a pretty good idea, cause we were all banded together at that time to keep members Out. Some of you will remember that it was a little difficult to get into one of these Locals. Now we're in an anti-union administration. We have to band together and we have to organize. To organize, the way it is setup now, when you're thinking about this, and when you're discussing this, I want you to keep in mind when we get ready to organize these other people that are unorganized, the most difficult part is the organizing the people into the Death Benefit Fund. They don't, the young people, like you said in there, those old guys, (damn near one myself.) It's a good idea but somebody 23 years old to pay into this thing x number of years, if they were to take that much money and put in a CD it would be ten times as much as they're going to get out of the Death Benefit. So they got to bear this in mind when we're discussing this thing. And I'd like to interject my little idea if I can. I think we should freeze this thing right at the level it is and not take any more members into it and just keep it amongst ourselves. This is just a suggestion, not a motion. I just want people to think it over when we start discussing this thing. I liked your report and it's very good. Thank you.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Any other questions? If not we'll vote on the motion. Those in favor say I, opposed no, carried.

Back to Top of Page

Recommendations Of The District Secretary

         Death Benefit Fund: Increase the Death Assessment to $2.50 effective with the Fourth (4th) Quarter of 1988. Benefit payable to remain at $1500.00 until First of January 1989. For any member with a date of death of 1 January 1989 and after, the benefit payment shall be $1600.00. Effective First of January 1990 (date of death) the benefit payable shall be $1750.00.

         Salary of the District Secretary shall remain at $1400.00 annually until first of January 1989. Effective the first quarter Of 1989 it will increase to $1450.00 annually and effective the first quarter of 1990 to $1500.00 annually.

         Per capita from the local unions based on membership shall remain at $1.25.

         Per Diem payments to delegates who are approved representatives at this 47th Convention shall receive a sum to be calculated by dividing the number of delegates assembled into Twelve Hundred Dollars ($1200.00). In the event that the number of delegates is less than twelve (12), the maximum per them shall be One Hundred Dollars ($100.00). Approved Special Department guests in attendance shall receive one half (1/2) of the delegate per diem.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Any discussion on the Recommendations?

         DELEGATE FRIEDLI LOCAL 887: As Mr. Hart said, they should freeze the program as it is now. A lot of the-new people that come in like to have this as an option rather than mandatory. What would be the problem in having this as an option rather than have to take part in it.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Well if I could give my side of it, I suppose any group plan you have, to be effective-be worth while anywhere near any pool-you're going to have just that, a group plan, everybody joins it or you don't. If you had a particular situation I guess you would have a situation where the young people wouldn't join it; they were 64 and decide to go into it. Some things you just have to mandate to be done or else it isn't worth while doing, that's why it's been Successful up to this point, because everybody has to contribute to it.

         DELEGATE FRIEDLI LOCAL 887: Well they wouldn't join it when they're 65, they would have an option when they became a member either take part in it or not at all.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Well, if I could do that, I don't know, but getting down the line I think you w would be causing yourself more problems than it would be worth. There is one problem here, which is bothering me for sometime and again I have not checked the records. When this thing went into effect back in the 40's and Floyd said he took part in it then and there are not to many people around that go back that far I guess. It was approved by the Insurance Commissioner at that time or the Insurance Department of the State of Washington. It was approved because Jacobson had a lot to do with this thing. Why it was approved in the State of Washington, not the other states, I don't know, except it was my-it was implied that the other states did not have anything to cover such a thing and that is why it was called a Death Benefit Fund, because it was not an insurance thing, and I just keep wondering, in this day and age, if we made the Insurance Commissioner aware that we have this fund, and we have this $100,000.00, he might hold his head in agony and wonder, good grief, what are we doing with this thing. I mean we are allocating this thing out in certain ways, and all we got to do is get ourselves a lawyer and pay a couple of days work on this thing and our fund will be diminished considerably. In that respect we don't have that much money. So kind of the way I look at it, I guess, we got a Death Benefit Fund that helps a little bit as we go along and we are not going in the hole, not costing anybody a lot of money, it's worth while, and it's plain-simply that's it. I think we have to keep in mind is this, the way I look at it, in my Local I got a Secretary and every time he has to write out a check, he yells, screams and hollers, but we are paying this individually, this is out of my pocket, I am paying $2.00 or $2.50 a month. Now maybe you incorporate into your dues structure, that's up to you, but you as a individual are paying this $2.00 or $3.00 to insure that tomorrow or one hundred years from now you're going to drop dead and somebody is going to get this number of dollars and that's, the way you got to look at it.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Yes.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: 1 don't think the problem is the $2.50 or the $3.0O or the $10.00. The problem is, in Our Local for example, we have "B" Status members, we were able to organize the Coliseum and we have about twenty members under City Plans. We have now been engulfed by the ER Commission and have assumed all the janitorial and set-up people in all the buildings in the city. It is very likely with the building of the Convention Center, the ER Commission will be merged into Metropolitan Exposition-Recreation Commission, which our contracts may be merged into the new Commission. Right now we are going to pick up within the next six months about ten new Utility Members. The District Constitution states that any person obligated to pay full membership dues in the Local shall participate in the District Insurance. For eight years we have been trying to get this matter straighten out so at least we should be paying Per-Capita on all our members, and it has never been settled. Back to this other point, most of these people we are organizing of Course, we have a shop we are organizing, were going to take it, they're not interested in paying $380.00 dues; you have to take them in and probably charge them $160.00 per year, so they don't want to pay the $2.50, they don't want to pay anything, in the first place they don't want to come in anyhow. I think we have to address the future of the District more than the Death Benefit, the only way we can grow in the District is to organize and the only way we can organize is to take people in and we are not taking people in as stage people any more. We have a Wardrobe section, a Utility Coliseum section, we probably are going to have a Shop section and depending how the film department goes with Seattle we may have film department, who knows. These people are not going to pay full dues as a Stagehand, and they are not interested in insurance. Now, they may be when they die, but as of now they're only interested in initiation fees. As you all know if you are taking in a bunch of members and organizing, the office is very happy in relinquish membership fees, initiation fees the processing fees has been wavered. I have wavers right now for the Shop I am organizing. Then turn around and the local spends $25.00 to put these people in the District Fund and charge them, it's not in the cards. What you have said, Tommy is right, we have $100,000.00 and everybody that's in there is entitled to it. I also can figure out pretty fast that if you freeze it somewhere along the line we still have to keep it up. We either got to take the 600 membership now and continue to pay on the 600 membership and do not take anymore in. I just can not see the District expanding and the Locals being burdened to have to pick up the insurance fee of getting them started and charge these members to pick it up. It isn't the days that when this was established, it was easy to do that, it isn't that easy anymore, we have to take in anybody when we organize and they want the least amount of dues to pay. No matter if they pay it Out Of their pocket or no matter if the Union pays it. I think the only thing that can be done is to freeze it and that we don't take in any new members, we pay our $2.00 or what ever we feel is justified here and at the point to keep this fund self sustaining, to keep the benefits up to the $1200.00 or $1300.00 or $1400.00. As it decreases and if interest is down we may have to kick in a little more to keep this going till it runs out, but we got to do something this Convention to either stop it, freeze it so that the Locals can expand, and dues is the biggest problem with organization, I think everybody will agree with me on that. I mean you just can't charge anybody $500.00 initiation fee anymore. You can't charge $300.00 or $400.00 dues, especially if they're working in our city jobs, all these are covered, they have these benefits and I grant you it's only $2.50, but it just isn't working. That seems to me to be the biggest problem. To raise it, I don't know, I just know it's got to freeze.

         DELEGATE ALWARD LOCAL 28: Tommy, could I ask you some questions about some of the options that you put in your report. Have we ever taken this to an insurance company or looked at having a professional managed fund to vest the members that are all ready in, or somehow increase the investment income of the $100,000.00, has that ever been explored?

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Not as such Peter, but Chris did years ago and what I did on my own, I think two or three Conventions ago, went to insurance companies, trying to take this sum of money, was so much and first of all no one interested in writing anything less than $5000.00 so for $8.00 so for $10.00 a month you can get a good plan and get accident insurance thrown in and some health and welfare. The other thing is, it decreases as you get older. When a person becomes sixty or sixty five you might get 30% or 70% of the money and come seventy five you get 50%, you become eighty you get nothing, a lot of insurance is written that way and also the big problem is how do you pay this thing. The way just enough Locals unions in this District pay in arrears you have to make out one lump check to these people on a monthly or annual basis or something, it isn't going on forever. Becomes quit complex, Plus though, in fact that these insurance companies will guarantee this will be your rate this year, you have no control what's going to happen next year. Any of you who have insurance programs in your local unions over the past years and negotiated them know what control you have over these programs, you are at their whim, you don't like them you get someone else. So that is what I found out and I couldn't put anything together.

         DELEGATE ALWARD LOCAL 28: All right, are the options that you have in your report, are there more options that we haven't considered here?

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Very possible, we could go into a professional management and it would take a $1,000,000.00 of your money and charge you one or two percent or something that's another way to go.

         DELEGATE ALWARD LOCAL 28: 1 don't want to break the bank hiring consultants, as we all know what that's worth. I just want to echo that the organizing the unorganized should be our number one goal in this District because we are loosing Locals and loosing members and we need to make it so we can organize a little better and the cost is just prohibited. When you tell a guy that he got spend more than he gets on his first job to get in the Club it's pretty hard to organize. So I would like to raise my voice in voting for a freeze.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Yes.

         DELEGATE DEVEREAUX LOCAL 93: Since I first came to a convention, back four or five conventions ago we discussed the Death Benefit Fund and like Floyd said it was put in the 40's with great intentions but time has changed and I can understand it. In larger Locals, in Seattle and Portland it must really be a headache, because in Spokane, which is a small Local by IA standards, probably a good size Local by District standards, our District anyway. We have tried our best to, we have so many problems with the Death Benefit Fund, basically we tried to hide it, we include it in our dues. We use to collect $2.00 per man. That was a killer. The $25.00 the Local paid, but I been secretary for years and worked with Tommy. When you hand out the paper work and those people who have paid into it for years get the $1500.00, they need it, they really like it, but I think the longer it goes on, the tougher it gets to do something with it and I think we have to Come up with a plan at this Convention to do something about it. It is not going to be a-you know six years ago about self sustaining and like Tommy said when interest rates were twelve and thirteen percent it looked like an ideal situation. That doesn't look like it's going to happen. We have $100,000.00 sitting there and that's when you're trying to negotiate or you're trying to get membership they say $100,000.00 in this Fund" and yet all they see is money going out of their pocket or out of the Locals' pocket. They don't see those benefits and when you're younger you don't see the $1500.00 you're going to pick up later on. So I guess I would echo that we need to do something about it. I'm not going to necessarily say to freeze it or what ever, because there are a lot of other people here-some good ideas -Lit we need to do something about the fund.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Would anybody else like to speak?

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Mr. Chairman, if I might try to address John DiSciullo, Peter, Pat. First of all John, the statement you made that this District has never addressed the problem with this special situation you had in Local 28. Some years ago, we did address it in great length through the Constitution and By-Laws.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: It still is not right.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Well, Ok you were the one that sat there and was talking about it said these people the same words you're saying today, they Couldn't afford it and could not be part of the Death Benefit Fund and they are not part of the Death Benefit Fund.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL '48: But the ruling was made that if you didn't pay the Death Benefit Fund you didn't have to pay per capita on those members.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Well that must be between you and the International I don't know.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: The International would never make a decision. I tried, as you know, to get a meeting with you and I and Walter about this same problem. Our Union is not disputing the fact that paying per capita, and I think that all the Locals in the District even A or B should be paying some type of per capita to be part of this District, so we can get some membership in the District. It's just ludicrous.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: OK John, let's stick to the subject, one thing at a time. We're talking about per capita we're talking about Death Benefit Fund, which is addressed in the Constitution and By-Laws of this District. But Local 28's, the situation they have, there was a Utility program and before we ever came on the scene that was some arrangement with the International, it has nothing to due with this District. Now I feel the same way John does that everybody in this District should pay per capita and even the Death Benefit Fund. But it is not the way our Constitution is written; I took this up with Walter Diehl some years ago. He said, "sure you can do it if the Special Department will agree to it and will go in to it." I talked to the Special Departments, but again you got the same thing, they don't make enough money, they can't afford it. You know this becomes that non-ending road, we can't afford it. You can afford anything, it's just what it's worth to you, and do you want a Death Benefit Fund? Somebody did once, but if we don't want it now let's do away with it some how, some way.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: That isn't fair either.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: But you can't say, you know our per capita doesn't change. What the Local Unions charge in dues is up to them. We have Local Unions that make the dues fit. We have to pay a per capita of $20.00 per member per quarter so we're going to charge you $4(.00 or $21.00 or $221.50 that's up to You. You want a viable organization or do you want a bunch of members paying per capita. You can argue that endlessly. Our problem is not getting just members into local unions, it's getting worthwhile members into 10C.11 unions, that will support unionism and will be competent and be able to do the job.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: We don't have that option anymore. We don't have that option at all anymore.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: This gentleman here wants to speak.

         DELEGATE BRYAN LOCAL 15: I'm not exactly sure what this last discussion has to do with freezing the Death Benefit fund. Whether we want union members that are interested in unions or not. If we were to freeze the Death Benefit Fund, how would we freeze it, would we have everybody in there now stay in there. Would people in there have the option of withdrawing? Because if we got some younger members that we just took in they might say, well I don't want it now and can I get out of it now that I am in there. How would you deal with it or if we were to disband it what would the money be used for.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Elizabeth was next.

         DELEGATE ROSENBLATT LOCAL 675: I have a question about so thank you Paul for addressing it. What happens if you freeze it and then the people in it, in order to keep it going, we have to end up paying more money in because the amount of money we have with the amount of people that are in it catches up with us sooner or later. So then the people, who are presently paying in, us, we would end up increasing it for those of us who are the union kind of people. I don't see how a freeze works.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Do you want to answer that.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: I can't answer that. I don't know how you would without having a lot of problems.

         DELEGATE ALWARD LOCAL 28: Have we ever checked into the idea of buying a annuity for the members that have been paying in for either one month or for forty years or forty eight years and buying a annuity for everybody that's all ready on the books and finding out what it's going to cost just to get out of the program that way. Have we ever investigated that?

         SECRETARY WATTERS: No, because we have never talked about doing away with it Peter. Now if that is what you want to do, that is what we would have to do. We would have to go to an insurance company and say-look we got a $100,000.00 what can you give these six hundred people.

         DELEGATE ALWARD LOCAL 28: Then what we have to do here is we need to pick a direction. We either have to say we are going to go forward and explore options in that path, or we are going to have to, or decide to freeze it or at least as Pat suggested, changing it.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: That's right, you are going to have to make a decision, you are absolutely right.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: Maybe the word freeze was not a good word to use. I think probably the word to use at this point would be vest everybody that's in it now. So maybe the word vesting is better than the word freezing and we would not accept new members into the plan. We would address the Secretary or the Advisory Board within the next two years to come up with a solution of vesting everybody to a plan like Peter was talking about and keep paying on the Death Benefit we're paying now the basic rate for another two years with the $1500.00 benefit until we come back at convention or until the Advisory Board can come back with a solution that may be able to increase our benefits or with the $100,000.00 money we have, but I think the problem is if it is not a decision with a majority vote that we should freeze it, then that's fine. I'm just making a statement as our local looks at it. But we have to start somewhere and what we are looking at now is really in the next year of two to come up with an answer but to not take anymore people into it until we come up with a solution that we can vest these people and make sure they get their Death Benefit. My idea is to freeze it so everybody gets his Death Benefit and that everybody is vested as of this Convention.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Floyd.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: That was the suggestion I had when I made the suggestion in the first place. I meant to say that we should vest the people that are now in the program and not take anymore in the program. Just vest the ones that are in there. I think we have the cart before the horse discussing a motion that has not been made.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: That's what I was going to say. Your only discussing now and you can make a motion later on.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Well I would like to make a motion at this time "That we vest people that are in this program and within the next two years, between the Advisory Board, the Secretary figure someway that we can implement this thing by the next Convention". That's my motion.

         DELEGATE ALWARD LOCAL 28: I'll second that.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Any discussion on the motion.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Mr. Chairman, The motion as I understand it Floyd, is that you want to make a decision on this by the time of the next Convention?

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: That's correct.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: I think as a suggestion it would be better off if you come to the next Convention with the Delegates to decide, as you are going to have to change the Constitution of this District.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: If that's what it has to be, that's what it has to be.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Well, knowing how much time the District Secretary has, not that you can't get the information in two years, that's fine, but a decision to be made by then, I don't see how you're just as of this Convention tomorrow, next month chop it off and say we take in nobody else, but your Constitution doesn't read that way. Now we can change the Constitution today but it has to be done in a certain way to do it. We are going to have to get it in writing and bring it up to you delegates to decide. But be careful, you've got a lot of wonderful ideas. But wonderful ideas have to be practical. I don't know if we can unilaterally change something unless we have some research to see what can be done. Your idea, for example like taking the $100,000.00 and going to some insurance fund and saying what can we do for these 600 people. You might end up giving them S50.00 each when they die. Maybe it will be $2000.00 I don't know. The way I figure it, it would not be much money, but maybe they come up with something on a long range.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Could we appoint a committee at this Convention to figure this thing out and implement it someway.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Well, implement is what worries me Floyd, I think come back to the next Convention with some fact and figures what we can do.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Well all right, lets do something about it because we been talking about now, like Pat said, for six, eight years. Let's get a committee to examine this thing and get some ideas and bring it to the next Convention and solve this thing.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: What I am reading here is that, and I'm thinking that if your speaking for the majority of the delegates here, and the delegates are speaking for their members, that you do indeed want to do away with this Death Benefit Fund.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: 1 didn't say do away with it, no I said vest the interest we have in it now.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Then you are doing away with it, no more future, it just takes care of now and the past.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Just the people that are in at this time, so we can organize these unorganized. When Samuel Gompers started this movement its purpose was to organize the unorganized. Let's start organizing these guys, and we can't hardly do it when we start hitting them with a $25.00 fee then $2.00 a death and I say when they are young, with someone like me it's to my advantage, because it isn't going to be to long that I'm in the other call.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: That's what you said 25 years ago.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Well I know that, I keep promising.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: All right, just let me say this (and I'll say this in my opinion, and not as a District Secretary but as a Delegate), I think, your thinking is very foolish. You're not going to organize anymore because of $2.00 or $2.50 a month. You have a program here, your only decision has to be whether you want to keep this program, keep it viable or if you want to do away with it, But if you are going to be sucked in by this charge that we can't organize because of this $2.00 death assessment, that is not your problem.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: 1 resent you saying anything I say is foolish.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: An old man you, have grounds to.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: 1 resent that and I'm a delegate here and I'm entitled to my opinion and my opinion is that we got to do something about this damn Death Benefit thing so we can organize these people.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: You have brought a lot of people in Floyd, it doesn't tie in. You want to do away with the Death Benefit Fund, that's fine. I have my own opinion, that's fine if that's what the majority wants. But don't use it as a tool saying now we can go out and organize people cause we're going to do away with $2.00 a month.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15; It will be a hell of lot easier to organize.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Would it really?

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Sure it would.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: You mean to tell me you bring people in and say, we got a $2.00 death benefit, and they say, if you didn't have that I would join?

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: How about those guys in Montana in your report, have they paid theirs yet?

         SECRETARY WATTERS: With those three locals, we have a heck of a time with them. That's the problem, that's why I'm not up here really yelling and screaming we should keep it cause we don't have all the Local Unions supporting the darn thing and it's a headache to the District. We would have more money if they would support it. So we got to go to the majority.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: I'm not trying to make a decision myself. I only made a motion for these people to vote on.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: That's right, that's right, I understand that.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: You're entitled to your own opinion and I'm entitled to my opinion.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: But I'm just saying don't, you're misleading people by saying it will be easier to organize now by doing away with the District Death Benefit Fund. I can't buy that, as a delegate, as a person.

         DELEGATE HART: Don't you have anybody that complains about that $2.00 in your local?

         SECRETARY WATTERS: People complain because they have to join the damn Union, it's too expensive. They pay more to the Union than they make on the job.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: We got about 150 members and half of them beefing about having to pay that Death Benefit.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: We had it for years, it's not going to go away.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Peter.

         DELEGATE ALWARD LOCAL 28: 1 have some questions about your comments, Tom, about the Constitution and By-Laws of the District not being able to-not being able to make a change here. Can we not by a vote of this District Convention reduce the Death Benefit payable by each member to zero and can we not reduce the initiation into the Death Benefit Fund to zero also?

         SECRETARY WATTERS: I think you could take the reading of that and compare it with the intent Peter, I Would say you're absolutely right, but I think you are using words. It is the will of the Delegates. I was responsible for changing that two or four years ago because it was a hassle that we convened here to continue a program and lower or increase it, that's why you have your recommendations. But in my mind you're talking about doing away with something that is you're future program. So let's do it right up front not make a play on words and put a zero where a figure should be.

         DELEGATE ALWARD LOCAL 28: Well, yes I understand that but you were saying that we couldn't, even if we voted Floyd's motion that we couldn't carry it out because of the Constitution and By-Laws.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: I didn't say the District Death Benefit Fund is a part of the Constitution and By-Laws and again I say if you want to do away with that then You got to put it in the Constitution and By-Laws.

         DELEGATE ALWARD LOCAL 28: Well I don't think Floyd wants to do away with the Death Benefit Fund Plan. I think he wants to vest the interests of the people who are all ready participating and he wants to take good long look at it from all points of view and find a way out of it. It is a lousy investment for new members. You're better to put your money in a saving account; you would end up with more. Now You can't convince the kids to put money in a saving account, but were going to organize a shop with people that have a top rate of $7.50 a hour. We can't convince them to pay $25.00 coming in plus $30.00 a year of Death Benefit Fund they might not see for 40 years or longer. It just doesn't hold water.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: But those people you don't have in the Death Benefit Fund, do you?

         DELEGATE ALWARD LOCAL 28: When we organize them and got them cards in Local 28, yes they would have to join, wouldn't they?

         SECRETARY WATTERS: That's part of your Utility, isn't it?

         DELEGATE ALWARD LOCAL 28: It's a shop contract were talking about.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: I mean are those people, those 79 members you pay on, is that one of those?

         DELEGATE ALWARD LOCAL 28: No, we're talking about organizing new members. We're organizing people in the craft that are doing the work all ready.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: OK, the point is you can organize better if we do away with the District Death Benefit Fund. I had my say. I don't believe it. Let's do away with it, but let's pick a way to do it so it's right, not to make a play on figures like zero or something.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Delegate in the back.

         DELEGATE FRIEDLE LOCAL 887: I Would concur with Tommy, I don't think that the Death Benefit has anything to do with organizing. It's true that the younger people gripe about it every time you say new, DA's you hear the sigh of desperation but I don't think that has anything to do with oganizing. But I do feel that the younger people would like an option whether to join the plan or not. That's my position. As I said earlier something of an option.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Elizabeth.

         DELEGATE ROSENBLATH LOCAL 675: So, is there a way, if we vote on Floyd's motion and it were to pass, that also in there is there a amendment or is it worth while table to a committee or something so that we don't, if we decide in two years after doing what ever investigation, that really in fact it is beneficial to the people who are coming in or it is in a majority after we sit down and tell people that this is something that these new members decide if they want the plan or not. My fear in passing your motion Floyd is that if it passes then if we do investigate and it's up to Peter and John, Pat and everyone that has been talking about and we find out that it is worth while for people to be in it, then we have to turn it all around then and all the people that aren't in it would get to join the that point?

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Yes.

         DELEGATE BRYAN LOCAL 15: Could you read the motion, and then let me address it.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Think we would have to get it from the tape. Floyd, did you make the motion?

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Yes, but I forgot what it was. The intent of the motion was to get some kind of a committee together to study the program and bring it back at the next convention for action. Something we can talk about so we know what we're talking about. There are some people in this room that don't know what were talking about. We understand what we're talking about, I think.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: I think we understand the motion and I think we should second the motion, am I correct?

         DELEGATE ALWARD LOCAL 28: 1 second the motion. And the body was the Advisory Board was named in the motion.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Right.

         DELEGATE BRYAN LOCAL 15: If we were to reduce it to zero, the fee and keep the $2.50 a month it Would solve the purpose for the time being until the next Convention of bring people in, and what Would cost the fund over a two year period? How many members are we talking about, maybe not that many. From a $100,000.00 fund we aren't going to be risking very much are we, if we solve your problem by just lowering that initiation fee or the enrollment fee or what ever you call it. Lower the fee to solve your problem but leave the fund intact, they're not going to complain as much about the $2.50 when somebody dies and maybe that would run it till the next Convention two years from now.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: You want to do away with the $25.00 enrollment or alter it, is that what you want?

         DELEGATE BRYAN LOCAL 15: That was an alternative that I'm suggesting.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: You can do that by Delegate approval.

         DELEGATE ALWARD LOCAL 28: 1 would like to amend Floyd's motion.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Has anyone written this motion down, other than what were picking up here?

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: We have a assistant Secretary here he's taking notes isn't he?

         SECRETARY WATTERS: No, nobody is taking notes. I thought this was going to be a nice smooth situation, but were going to have to write down some of these things.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Let's write the resolution down, I mean the motion.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: I'm going to amend the motion in writing.

         DELEGATE ALWARD LOCAL 28: I'll yield to John.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Yes.

         DELEGATE DEVEREAUX LOCAL 93; 1 would like to address it one more time. I think we have discussed the Death Benefit Fund every Convention I have been to. We have talked about it and like Floyd said a lot of people in here are very unaware of what we're dealing with and I don"t think in a hour or a two hour discussion we should throw something Out that has been there for forty years. Maybe it should be thrown out but it's going to take some work. What I would hate to see as a delegate to the Convention and a member to District One is another situation where we look at it and come back two years from now and we discuss it and then we say let's bring it back in two more years and I see a few people nodding their heads and smiling because that is what we done. I think we need to come through with a very, it's the intent of the people here that a goodly number, I won't say a majority, a goodly number feel that something drastically has to be done as far as keeping this Benefit Fund rolling along with new people being added to it and gaining some monies, yet it's not going to be a self-sustaining fund. So I would just hope that anything we do today will have some positive results at the next Convention.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Could I go back to Floyd. Could I see in my own mind if this is what your motion is. "To form a committee of three people of this delegation to study this question, bring it back to the next Convention. Now I don't know if you have a one year Convention or a two year Convention, two year convention with some facts and figures or the ability to change the Constitution and By-Laws". Is that what I hear? Floyd.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Yes, that's about it.

         DELEGATE BRYAN LOCAL IS: Didn't he say the Advisory Board?

         CHAIRMAN LONG: We'll appoint a committee of three people and make them the advisory committee to study this and come back the next Convention for your determination and then at that time you can vote to change the Constitution and By-Laws or leave it as it is. Is that what you wanted Floyd?

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: That's practically what it is, yes, that would be good enough.

         DELEGATE ALWARD LOCAL 28: Nick, we have an Advisory Board that's a formal standing committee in this District. I believe that was mentioned in the motion I seconded.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: OK, that's fine, we'll use the Advisory Board then. Yes.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: The only thing wrong with the Advisory Board is, we have some people in very remote areas and it would be very expensive to this District to have a meeting of the Advisory Board. You would have to do that by mail.

         DELEGATE BRYAN LOCAL 15: You could have a conference call, that's not that expensive these days.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Do I read that the Advisory Board is Floyd Hart, Washington, Irvin Renz, Montana, William Jackson, Alaska and Peter Alward, Oregon. You are spread out very thin.

         DELEGATE ALWARD LOCAL 28: Well the intent is to have someone -from each state.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Can you communicate with one another, or you could by telephone or by mail. Yes John.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: I wrote a motion.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: We're on a motion now and the motion has a second. Why don't we vote that and either accept or reject it then and then you can make a motion and go from there. It will be the best way to do it.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 28: Is John's an amendment to the motion or is it a new a new motion?

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: Well I wrote it out, I don't know what you want to call it. I could call it an amendment to your motion.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Let's call it an amendment, then we can vote on it right away, can't we?

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Mr. Chairman, point of information, could I make a suggestion if it would make any sense to you at all. We seem to be rambling around to do something before the next Convention. Can we get some ideas on this and maybe it would be more worth while to refer this to the Insurance Committee which is going to meet after we adjourn the morning session and you people who are concerned meet with the Insurance Committee then come back this afternoon with a definite recommendation on what to do. You seem to have two or three people that are trying to get something across but are not to Sure what they want and the Insurance Committee Would be the one to talk to, get back the facts and figures and come up with, you want to do something before the next Convention, you want to make a resolution and amendment, change the constitution today or do You want to do it the next Convention.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15 I'd like to hear John's amendment before we do anything.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: For information, have him read it.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Go ahead.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: My amendment to Floyd's motion would be: "All members of local unions affiliated with the District shall be vested in the Death Benefit Plan as of August 6, 1988. As of this date no future members we be accepted into this plan. All Locals will continue to pay DA's of $2.00 per member per death for the next two years until the next Convention, where the District Secretary and Advisory Board will make a final Solution to this body". Now in section three of the District Death Benefit Fund the first paragraph of section three could be replaced by this and maybe it couldn't, it would have to be up to the Resolution Committee or the Insurance Committee because as it states now, "All members of Locals Unions affiliated with this District shall be required to participate in the Death Benefit Fund. Any person obligated to pay full membership dues in a Local Union of this District shall be required to fill out a Beneficiary card, supplied by the District, accompanied with an enrollment fee payable to the Local Unions". That paragraph could be amended with My Motion. That would be up to the Constitution Committee and that would continue the fund for two years for the people that are there and by next year or by the next Convention we could come up with a solution. If that makes any sense.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: I think what we should do is to take a vote to refer it to the Insurance Committee and have them come as an amendment to the Constitution, because this is going to study to come up with an answer.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: That's all right with me.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: It's all right with me.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Are you going to make a motion to table this too, or just refer it to the Insurance Committee?

         DELEGATE DEVEREAUX LOCAL 93: I make the motion to refer it to the proper committee and take it up after those committees have meet this afternoon.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Which is the proper committee?

         SECRETARY WATTERS: The Insurance Committee.

         DELEGATE DEVEREAUX LOCAL 93: I think the Secretary would assign this to the proper committee.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: It's up to you Pat. Refer it to the Insurance Committee.

         DELEGATE DEVEREAUX LOCAL 93: Sure, OK, I make a motion to refer it to the Insurance Committee and take it up this afternoon.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: I think what you should do is really handle the other motion first, get rid of that and then make your motion.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: I'll withdraw my motion in favor of Johns.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Are you withdrawing your Motion, and who seconded the Motion?

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: I withdraw my motion.

         DELEGATE ALWARD LOCAL 28: I withdraw my second.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Then Floyd's motion is out, now John, you got to make the motion, your motion.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: I'll make the motion that this amendment to the Constitution of the Insurance Fund as written shall be referred to the Insurance Committee for future study and that the committee report back this afternoon. Does that work?

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Yes.

         DELEGATE ROSENBLATH LOCAL 675: 1 second the motion.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Any discussion on that motion.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: I call for the Question.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: All those in favor say I, opposed, carried. OK now this motion will go to the Insurance Committee and you will bring back a recommendation this afternoon.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: For your information, you have two ways to go all Delegates. You can present yourself to the Insurance Committee which is stated in your brochure there with your feeling on this and the other thing when it comes back, what ever the recommendation is or amendment or what ever, You can talk on it and vote on it this afternoon. Keep in mind it will be a vote by the Delegates assembled here. According to our Constitution a majority will prevail.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: Point of order.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Yes.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: Am I correct that it takes two-thirds majority vote, is this right?

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Yes, a majority vote.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: How does your Constitution read on that?

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Just a majority vote.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Two-thirds majority vote.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: You're looking at the Advisory Board.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: OK, we're still under recommendations, are there any other discussions on recommendations. If not I'll take a motion to accept the recommendations.

         DELEGATE ALWARD LOCAL 28: So moved.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Second.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: All in favor say I, opposed carried. OK, recommendations accepted. Point Number 2, the recommendation, any questions?

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Move it be accepted.

         DELEGATE BRYAN LOCAL 15: Second.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Any discussion on the Motion? All those in favor say I, opposed carried. Number 3, per-capita from Local Unions at $1.25 per member. Any discussion on that? I'll take motion.

         DELEGATE DEVEREAUX LOCAL 93: Moved it be accepted.

         DELEGATE GILBERT LOCAL 175: Second.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Any discussion? All those in favor say I, opposed, carried. Number 4, per them payments to the Delegates. Any discussion?

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: 1 make a motion we accept.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Second.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: All those in favor say I, opposed, carried. That takes care of all the resolutions.

Back to Top of Page

Report of Committees

          CHAIRMAN LONG: OK then, the next thing will be Committee Reports.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Except there will be one change. We'll have a report from the Resolutions Committee, which we did not discharge yet and that's Devereaux 93, and Alward 28. They have a presentation to make.

         DELEGATE ALWARD LOCAL 28: Resolution Committee met and the representative from Eugene, Liz Rosenblath presented the following resolution, which I will read. It reads: "Whereas, the labor movement has always been opposed to any type of discrimination, and whereas, labor management has made leaps and bounds towards eliminating employment discrimination, and whereas, the initiative ballot measure number eight in the State of Oregon will contribute to discrimination based on non job related factors. Be it resolved that District Number One of the I.A.T.S.E. go on record at opposing any type of legislation or initiative proposals encouraging discrimination of any kind". This is dated August 6, 1988. The Resolution Committee recommends concurrence of this resolution.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Any discussion on the resolution? Committee recommends concurrence. We'll vote on that. All those in favor say I, opposed, carried. Resolution has been accepted.

          CHAIRMAN LONG: Are there any other resolutions?

         DELEGATE ALWARD LOCAL 28: That was the only resolution that before the Resolution Committee and that is our report.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Grievance Committee.

         DELEGATE JEWELL: No report.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Nobody has grievance, everybody happy.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Finance Committee report next.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Go ahead and make the report.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: No, the senior member should make the report.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: The Finance Committee met here in the hall, looked through the books. They were well done, well presented we accept them.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: All those in favor of the Finance Committee report say I, opposed, accepted. Insurance Committee report.

         DELEGATE BRYAN LOCAL 15: We got basically three recommendations. One, the Committee as it exists is to remain intact to explore opinions and poll the membership etc so that the Delegates can be informed prior to the next Convention with viable alternatives to the Fund. We felt that not knowing how the respective memberships really feel in total about the existence of the Fund and the differences of opinion as how this thing should go on, since the three of us live close together and we have all ready had our heads together a little bit on this, that we would volunteer here to keep the Committee intact and follow through on this so we can keep in touch with the Delegates and Local memberships, so they can vote, bring it before the body and so forth, so prior to the next Convention we will have some of these things all ready together. So that's the first one. The second is to maintain the current enrollment and assessment and benefit rates and the third is amend Section Three of the Benefit Fund portion of the Constitution, inserting the sentence before the second to the last sentence to read: (to give it the right continuity let me read the sentence before it). Enrollment fee shall be a sum approved by delegates at a regular Convention of this District, however when the International deems it appropriate to wave an applicant processing fee for organizational purposes, the Local may also wave the applicant enrollment fee. We felt that now and when we can hopefully resolve the status of Benefit Fund at the next Convention. This would address the problem of the enrollment fee affecting the ability of some of the Locals to organize and we didn't think that however many members they are talking about that, it would affect the fund itself. If were talking about fourteen or two dozen members, I don't know how many, but since the fund is close to being self sustaining and we're still going to be assessing $2.50 for each benefit that it's not going to hurt the fund over the two years. We thought that Would be a good way to answer John's concern without affecting the fund. So those are our three recommendations.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Well we haven't approved any $2.50 yet.

         DELEGATE BRYAN LOCAL IS: I meant $2.00.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: It is presently $2.00 and $1500.00.

         DELEGATE DEVEREAUX LOCAL 93: Tommy, I think the $2.50 is kind of-at one point this morning it was said it was approximately $2.50 a month. That's what the average was and that's where the $2.50 came in.

         DELEGATE ALWARD LOCAL 28: There's confusion, some people in this room feel that it's $2.50 a death and it's not.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: It is $2.00 now and $1500.00 and it's up to you. What is your recommendation?

         DELEGATE BRYAN LOCAL 15: That it remains the same.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Status quo $2.00.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: That's what I have down here, maintain as it is.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Now will somebody give that to me in English so I can understand what we're talking about. I want to know what the recommendation actually is. And what committee are you referring to? Referring it to the Advisory Board or to the Insurance Committee?

         DELEGATE BRYAN LOCAL 15: The Insurance Committee.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: What happened to the Advisory Board?

         DELEGATE BRYAN LOCAL 15: The Advisory Board remains intact. If the Advisory Board wants to help, that's fine we're volunteering ourselves to contribute to this and if there needs to be a change, the Advisory Board is the one that has to make the change according to the Constitution. So we are not trying to take over the Advisory Board.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: I understand that, I just wanted it clarified that the Advisory Board is a member of this Committee to make a decision or anything else relative to the fund.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: As I understand, it everything will remain the same till the next Convention unless there should be an emergency where the Advisory Board could change it and then they have that two thirds majority of the Advisory Board members to change it. So we're still covering that. The Insurance Committee is going to remain intact and talk or meet and within the next two years.

         DELEGATE BRYAN LOCAL 15: Could we change it to "assist the Advisory Board". The main focus there for us was that we thought we could help. Since our committee was here and talking about it, we could assist the Advisory Board if they want to lead the charge on it, that's fine.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: How do you feel about it John? Do you want to be a part of this or not?

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: No comment.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Well you got to make up your mind if you want to be a part of it or not.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: It's up to the vote, it has to be voted on.

         DELEGATE ALWARD LOCAL 28: I have a question of the committee. Didn't we refer a motion written by John DiSciullo to the committee and was there any action taken upon that?


         DELEGATE BRYAN LOCAL 15: I'll read the...this was submitted by John DiSciuillo. "All member of Local Unions affiliated with this District shall be vested in the Death Benefit Fund as of August 6, 1988. As of this date no future members will be accepted into this plan. All Locals will continue to pay DA's of $2.00 per member for all deaths for the next two years until the next Convention where the District Secretary with the help of the Advisory Board will bring a final solution to this body." The problem we saw with this is that if we have a solution that at the next Convention puts the benefit plan back the way it's operating now, we're going to have members who are not vested for two years and it seems that it's changed temporarily but in a sense permanently changing the structure of the Benefit Fund and since there was enough disagreement about whether on not to do that we didn't think that we wanted to recommend following through on actually changing the structure of the fund but since one of the concerns was being able to organize people and not charging them that $25.00. If a person could still do that for the next two years, if it was for organizational purposes, they wouldn't have to pay that $25.00. They could wave it. It wouldn't hurt the fund, it wouldn't change the structure of the fund, so he's getting his way and we're not going to have to deal with somebody who suddenly hasn't been vested +or two years and then their going to have to pay $85.00 to get back into it if we reinstate it, or are we going then to have to wave it for them. There are a lot of ifs that may come up the next Convention if we have frozen the fund and vested it. We don't even know how we would vest it. So that's why we recommended the alternatives.

         DELEGATE ALWARD LOCAL 28: The purpose of both of those are about the same, but John's written motion has some very specific things and the Finance Committee is a little less specific, that deals with the $2.00 part equally as well and it deals with the... maybe we can take the best parts of each and put them together.

         DELEGATE DEVEREAUX LOCAL 93: The Insurance Committee is recommending non-concurrence in the motion and is substituting a motion of their own. Is that correct? Just for the understanding of everybody.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: That's what I'm trying to find out.

         DELEGATE BRYAN LOCAL 15: Yes.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: But the body doesn't have to accept either, and or, or nothing.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Any other questions? All right, shall we vote on that? All those in favor, the, I guess YOU Would call that a resolution, I mean a motion. It would be a recommendation.

         DELEGATE DEVEREAUX LOCAL 93: Just before we vote on this. I just want to be real clear. Are we voting because the motion that John presented was not, that was withdrawn, wasn't it John?

         SECRETARY WATTERS: No, it was referred to the Insurance Committee.

         DELEGATE DEVEREAUX LOCAL 93: I guess what I would like to know is, if we're voting, are we voting, because the Insurance Committee is substituting a resolution. So I think there are two separate issues as opposed to one issue.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: I think you said it, your recommendation is non-concurrence on the motion and substitute it with your recommendation.

         DELEGATE DEVEREAUX LOCAL 93: But I think we have to take the non concurrence first and then vote and depending on how that goes and then vote on the motion.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Well I guess we could. I'll leave that up to the Chairman.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: All right, lets do it that way. Do you all understand what he said? Do you want to repeat it again?

         DELEGATE BRYAN LOCAL 15: So we're going to vote on John's motion first, Of%`. His motion was to amend Section Three in its entirety and replace it with this?

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: Just the first sentence.

         DELEGATE BRYAN LOCAL 15: OK. All members of Local Unions affiliated with this District shall be vested in the Death Benefit Fund as of August 6, 1988. As of this date no future members will be accepted into this plan. All Locals will continue to pay DA's of $2.00 per member for all deaths for the next two years until the next Convention where the District Secretary with the help of the Advisory Board will bring a final solution to this body.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Any questions on that?

         DELEGATE JEWELL LOCAL 918; I'm a little confused at vested in the Death Benefit and no more members will be accepted into the plan, yet you have to pay DA's. $2.00 DA's on all members?

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: Only on the ones that are vested.

         DELEGATE JEWELL LOCAL 918: Only an the ones that are vested. I want to make that very clear.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Any new member would not be in the Fund. You would only be paying to the District per-capita no DA's on new members.

         DELEGATE JEWELL LOCAL 918: On what that membership is as of August 6, 1988.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Yes.

         DELEGATE ROSENBLATH LOCAL 675: I have a question about the possibility of this not being a legal binding thing because of keeping certain people who would be new members out of the program. So I don't even know what the legalities are.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: I wouldn't know what the legal points of it are. I think we can work on it and vote on it and if it's legal, fine and if it's not then we'll just have to strike it out. I really don't know.

         DELEGATE JEWELL LOCAL 918: Then would we have to go back and pay after we find out that it was not legal, go back and pay or back DA's?

         CHAIRMAN LONG: That may be it.

         DELEGATE JEWELL LOCAL 918: 1 think we are opening up a can of worms that we don't want to do.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: That may be a possibility. That would have to be up to the Secretary to check that out.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: I like to stay away from attorneys, they cost money.

         DELEGATE ROSENBLATH LOCAL 675: There must be an IA labor attorney walking around these four walls who could help us.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Just so you are aware of what could happen. Certainly this is put together in good faith and good understanding.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: If it does become a legal question you can always check with the International attorneys and find out if they could make a termination or give you an option on it.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Do we still have a West Coast attorney?

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Yes. Leo Geffner down at the Hollywood office and you could always check with him.

         DELEGATE JEWELL LOCAL 918: Could this be done quickly?

         CHAIRMAN LONG: I guess we could find out within a day or so.

         DELEGATE DEVEREAUX LOCAL 93: 1 think it would be a bad situation to let it go for a year and a half and take in fifty new members in the District and find out we couldn't do it. Also, anything can go to court and you can loose. Whenever you pass anything, that's just the way of modern times. I don't think we can concern ourselves every time we pass something, which isn't legal. I mean we have full intentions and I think we need to check it out and the International has attorneys here that can do that for us. That is taken up within the motion I believe.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Liz.

         DELEGATE ROSENBLATH LOCAL 675: 1 was just bringing it LIP because it seems like it is illegal to me.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Yes.

         DELEGATE BRYAN LOCAL 15: 1 think one of the reasons that it seems illegal is because there is a question if it is fair or not and when we vote on it that something we should look to. That's what raises the question of whether it is legal or not. Is it fair for us to have members that get this benefit, looking at it from the positive side that this is a service that we our offering people. Then telling new members that we brought in last month but this month telling them no you can't have it even if you want it but this other member can. And that is a fairness issue.

         DELEGATE DEVEREAUX LOCAL 93: For a number of years in our Local we have been threatened the other way. We don't have to do this and we have said oh yes you do you have to do it. So you can look at both sides. If you want. I guess the way to look at it you 11-'now if Your not offering it to everybody then you are being unfair. If they don't want it you can look at it by making them have it, you're being unfair. So it's just on what side of the issue you want to look at.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Any other. Yes.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: 1 suppose there is merit in all points and I suppose there is just as much merit when the IRS tells you today you pay a little more taxes but tomorrow you don't pay any and it shows that it is not very equal either. I gather the problem as I can see it, it is not the problem of fairness, and it is not the problem of equality. I think- the problem is that if we had brought in a motion to cancel the insurance it's just about as bad as what we're doing now. In two years from now if anything happens, which I doubt, and we come back in with a resolution to stop it altogether. As long as we're talking about being fair, think about that a little bit. Let's say it is a general consensus of the board and everybody to cancel it and it is voted on. How much trouble are you in then. What are you going to do with the $100,000.00? It is a very bad sore point and I have to say we discriminate in our Local. We have an insurance policy for A cards and don't have an insurance policy for the other members and I suppose that's discriminatory too. I don't know, if someone wants's to take you to court. I hope if nothing else comes out of this Convention, that finally this thing is not going to sit around another three or four years or six years and not be solved. Solved to a point that you keep it or you throw it Out, You equal it out or you vest everybody. I'm only looking at a standpoint of years down the line and I think your opening up a can of worms to keep it going and keep it funded. So I hope no matter what you vote on, right, wrong or indifferent, that this is not the end of the line and sit for two years and do nothing about it. I really think. it's going to create in a worse problem as we continue on in the District.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Yes.

         DELEGATE ROSENBLATH LOCAL 675: My understanding of this committee is in fact we have the guns to deal with it in a more tangible way. Granted I was only sitting in Florida two years ago for the first time with this exact issue and a nothing happened as far as I can tell then. This at least gives me some hope that there is movement happening. My fear is that has been stated by a number of people, and I certainly feel like if we just banded altogether a format for disbursing among those people who have paid in and/or the Locals that have paid in. If it has been such a point for four, six or eight years, I'm just wanting to state for the record that I am a little confused that no one has come forth with a clear Solution for the District year after year.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Any other discussion on it.

         DELEGATE DELEGATE BRYAN LOCAL 15: Not as a committee member but a Business Agent. We have since 88 taken in like nineteen new members and I don't have a feeling for what they think about this fund or if the general membership for that matter, so I feel a little uncomfortable going back to them and saying, we have frozen this and no new members can have it. I really don't know how the guys feel about it and representing them I feel uncomfortable voting to change it.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: That's what you're here for, you're representing your membership. Any other discussion? Yes.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: We are elected by the membership to represent them and they depend on us to make a decision on their behalf, whatever it happens to be. They don't instruct us what to do when we come to the Convention. We make those decisions as they're elected representatives. There are people; here that don't understand this. We are not dictated to, we're here representing the membership. We are here representing the membership but it is our decision what goes on at these Conventions.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: You're elected representatives and what ever your decision is binding.

         DELEGATE BRYAN LOCAL 15: I won't disagree with that, but to represent your membership properly you have to understand what their position is.          CHAIRMAN LONG: You represent their position when you are here. That's why we are all elected. Yes.

         DELEGATE GILBERT LOCAL 175: I agree with Paul, I would like to know what the members of my local think about the Insurance Fund before I make a decision and I feel at this point I can't make a decision.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Yes.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Mr. Chairman, what I have gotten from this discussion and talking to you before. I seem to get in trouble when I say this but I seem to get an opinion from the people talking here that they would like to do something to do away with this District Death Benefit Fund for future purposes, but not to take anything away from the people who contributed to or the people who are here etc. Our dilemma seems to be, how we our going to do this legally, fairly and all those good words. The way I look at it, I think John's motion was very well put and a good idea, except what I have heard here for the last several minutes. What the Insurance Committee has put together seems to push this delegation to make a definite decision by the next Convention. John's fear is, come two years from now we still have done nothing. If you take point one, you contact the members of the Insurance Committee, they're willing to help and they will bring in the Advisory Board because they can make decision between conventions and to decide by the next Convention. In other words, if you go back to your members and we come back 100% that no one wants this thing anymore or except for a few old guys that have contributed for so many years. I think we should proceed along John DiSciullo motion. The second part was to maintain it as is. As I see it, if nothing changes radically we can continue on indefinitely with out a deficit spending. Number three was to amend one small item to do away with the $25.00 enrollment fee if we take some in for organizational purposes. At least this person is not going to have to pay the $50.00 processing fee and the initiation fee to the local union, which is legal, and in the constitution. If we do away with $25.00 fee they can still be in the plan. It may not be totality fair but we are consistent with the other rules that mandate us to certain things. I am sure that in most local constitutions and by-laws that go along with the International Constitution, You can take in people and wave initiation fee for example, if it is for organizational purposes. We have never done it in our local but you can do it and maybe you have done it. John said he's done it twice. All I'm saying as it looks to me like you; our definitely directing this District to come back in two years and do something along the lines that John's has laid out. Our fears seem to be if it is legal, fair etc, etc.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Mr. Chairman, I call for the question.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: The question has been called for. All those in favor of DiSciullo's motion say I, opposed. I will call for a standing vote. All those in favor raise their hands. All those opposed. The motion was defeated eight to four. OK, now Pat you had something you wanted done.

         DELEGATE DEVEREAUX LOCAL 93: The Insurance Committees recommendations.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL '28: I move we accept the Insurance Committees recommendations.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Second.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Any discussion.

         DELEGATE BRYAN LOCAL 15: To amend the first part to read that the Insurance Committee under the guidance of the Advisory Board and the Insurance Committee remain intact to explore options so that the Delegates can be informed prior to the next Convention.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: I agree with that.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: I agree with it. I move we vote on it right now.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: All those in favor say I, opposed, carried.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Correct me if I 'm wrong. This is just a small item but it appears to me that instead of discharging all the Committees of this Convention we're going to have to hold the Insurance Committee till next Convention.

         DELEGATE BRYAN LOCAL 15: Does that mean we got to run again?

         SECRETARY WATTERS: No no, we usually discharge all temporary committees after this Convention.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: I vote we keep them in office.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Second?

         DELEGATE ALWARD LOCAL 28: Second.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: All those in favor, is there any discussion?

         SECRETARY WATTERS: I might throw into that if I could, that there might be some expenses, meeting, telephone calls.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: That goes without saying. That goes along with the cost of this thing.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Nothing goes without saying Brother Hart. I just want you to be aware of it.

         DELEGATE DEVEREAUX LOCAL 93: Question. They're going to act in conjunction?

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: In conjunction with the Advisory Board.

         DELEGATE DEVEREAUX LOCAL 93: The Advisory Board can approve expenses.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: OK, all those in favor of the recommendation say I, all those opposed, carried. Is there anything else under Committee Reports?

Back to Top of Page

Unfinished and New Business

         CHAIRMAN LONG: The next order of business is unfinished business. Is there any unfinished business?

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Yes, I have some unfinished business according to my notes. Can I get approval to pay for the coffee and rolls that were brought in this morning?

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: I move we pay the bill.

         DELEGATE JEWELL LOCAL 918; Second.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: On the motion, any discussion on it to pay the bill? If not, all those in favor say I, those opposed, carried

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Don't say I never supported you.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Is they're anything else under unfinished business? If not, we'll go to new business. Any new business?

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Mr. Chairman under new business I don't know if it's new business or good of the order or what the hell it is. For several years now we haven't had any representation from the IA. Any regular representation with an International Representative to this District. I would like to know why? So I would like to have the Secretary get hold of the International President and find we don't have a permanent International Representative in this District. We have representation, don't get me wrong, but we don't have somebody that is familiar with our problems that's in Our District that can help solve the problems. We should have somebody that's in our District like every other District has, and we don't have it and some of us are concerned about it. Some of our members are raising hell about it. Some way or another we have to impress on the International President that we must have an International Representative as the other Districts do.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Floyd, who does it, knows?

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Nobody.

         DELEGATE BRYAN LOCAL 15: The closest, is when we meet in Vancouver this summer. That was the last contact I have had.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: That was the last?

         DELEGATE BRYAN LOCAL 15: Yes and I was assuming that if we had any problems other than the movie stuff that Steve Flint and Walt Blanchard have been handling, that you were the one.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Yes, I was assigned.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: We should have our own.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: What you're asking for is an International Representative for your area that you could use?

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Yes, not a different one every time. I know you are a very highly competent man but you got problems to do in District #2. We need someone in District #1 that our people can go to and try and solve a problem.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: I think you have a very valid reason.

         DELEGATE DEVEREAUX LOCAL 93: In Local 93 I have been the locals representative for many years. Our president is new, fairly new to the local. He's been involved four or five years and the business agent the same way. Anything that happens, they are unaware they have to come to myself or one of the older members to find out even the remotest thing what to do. They have never had a representative from the International contact the local. Just if nothing else say how's it going we haven't heard from you guys for a while. A lot of the smaller locals in this District have expressed those concerns. A lot of times when we had an International Representative in District #1 you know you call him up and say, "this it what I got a problem with", at least they would tell you what to do. I can't do anything but call Walter and tell him this and he will call me and get something rolling. Right now we don't have that leadership. Are members our saying that should be coming from the IA. Well the IA will say, if you call us well do it but a lot of people don't know that.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: 1 don't want to change that problem. First place I'm out of order here because it should have went under good and welfare.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Well that's all right, we'll discuss it under new business.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: The procedure is, if you got a problem you wire the International or call the International and have the District Representative assigned to assist you in your problem. They don't come and dictate the problem they come and assist you, and I don't want to ever change that. I don't want the International telling me what to do but I want them to come in and help me. But we don't have anybody and I believe we should have someone in our own District that's aware of our own problems, not me, some of the Younger people that are working in this labor movement. We need the help. That's all I'm saying. I think we should do something about it right here.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Yes.

         DELEGATE JEWELL LOCAL 918: And being from Alaska we would like to have that representative be accessible. Alaska is not part of the continental United States but we are part of the IA. We are treated different by the United States post office; for one thing we have different fees to pay. So the accessible for us is very very important.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: I think your request is justified. Why don't you make a motion to have your Secretary contact the International Office and see if they can assign a permanent representative in this area. I don't know where this representative will come from but the International would get to it.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: The same representative each time.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Yes, Yes. So your motion Floyd would be?

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Assign a permanent International Representative for this District.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: I'll second the motion.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Any other discussion on that?

         SECRETARY WATTERS: It this motion to direct the Secretary of this District to get an answer on this?

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: Correct.

         DELEGATE ROSENBLATH LOCAL 675: Way before the next Convention.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Well I think that right after this Convention is over or maybe during the Convention the International President should be approached on it.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Can I just say one more thing on this. 1 don't want to alter any bodies vote on this, I agree with the concept of this but Floyd mentioned something and I just, so all of you, Some Of You that are new understand. The way the constitution is setup we do just that. If we have a problem in our area we are to wire, and it tells you how to do it, or write a letter or telephone the International President of the Alliance. It is within his power and only his power to appoint an International Representative which he probably has twenty-five or thirty. He can very well assign you someone from southern Florida to help out on an Alaskan problem or someone for Canada to come down to California. But of course just for reasons of area they try to get a representative that's close to that area that could call you. I guess over the years what we have done going all the way back to Jacobson and Phillips and so forth, if we had a problem we got on the telephone and made a small toll charge and again that person could advise us what to do, saying well can't come up on my own right now but the IA will assign me and I will be up. What Floyd is saying, it would be nice if we had somebody close rather than not knowing whom we are going to get. We in Local 154 have had that problem and you have in 15 and I don't know about the rest of you. Eventually you don't know whom you're getting and you have to sit down and explain the whole thing over again. It would be good to have that one person we could be getting that beginning advice from. What I want you to understand, what the procedure is and there is no International Representative assigned to a District as far as the make Lip Of the Constitution and By-Laws go. But I think Nick told me that Jake was here before they are trying to assign people in the different areas so they can be closer to the problems. That's the attempt now.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Any other discussion on that motion? If not we'll vote on it. All those in favor say I, those opposed, carried. So then the elected Secretary-Treasurer of this District contact Al sometime this next week, and when I see Al I will also mention it to him.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: If you could get him to write a letter or something.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Chances are he will do that to make it formal. I think you're very sound in asking. We in the Southern District, we have so many representatives there is never a problem. But you don't have that in this District.

         DELEGATE HART: We appreciate all the help we have had but we would like to have someone who is familiar with our problems to come here that knows LIS. When a guy comes here he's a hell of a good International Representative but he doesn't know anybody he's talking to. He's never met them or anything else. This way we have somebody who at least knows who the hell he's talking to if he calls him up on the telephone.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Absolutely, I certainly will mention it to Al and then the Secretary, whoever it may be, can follow up on it. I'm Sure he will request a letter and so on. The big problem is the cost or trying to organize and rep's to fill in these spots. We'll see this next weeks Convention will tell us a lot. OK, any other business? Under new business, any other questions under new business? If not then well go to Election of Officers and the Election Committee Report. We'll have the Election Committee Report after the election of officers.

Back to Top of Page

Nomination and Election of Officers

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Next thing is Nomination of. Officers.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Can I say something on this Nomination of Officers at this point. I'm prepared with the ballots and everything like we did last time. Just so we all understand this. This will be if anybody is nominated, will be a vote by secret ballot, individual ballots. We have an Election Committee who will be handling it. I have blank ballots, which we will fill out the position, but not the names. We will have one person on the Election Committee write in the name or names that are running for office. If nobody runs for office, there is no opposition then of course we won't have to vote. It will be done so nobody knows how anybody voted. We will have a secret ballot. Anybody who is not nominated will not be elected. This is my ruling and if you differ with what I'm saying please express your option or what ever to Our Chairman. You will have to be here to be nominated and you will have to be nominated as nothing is going to be automatic. With no further ado let's go ahead with the nominations.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: That's the way it should be, it should be by secret ballot. OK, the first one will be Nomination of Officers, Secretary-Treasurer.

         DELEGATE ALWARD LOCAL 28: 1 would like to nominate John DiSciullo for Secretary-Treasurer.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: John DiSciullo has been nominated, anybody else, any other nominations, any others, any others.

         DELEGATE DEVEREAUX LOCAL 93: I nominate Tommy Watters.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Tommy Watters for Secretary-Treasure, anybody else, any other nominees, any other nominees, closed. OK we will have an election. Next it will be Advisory Board, Alaska.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: I nominate the Delegate from Alaska. Denice Jewell.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Denice Jewell, any other nominees, any other nominees, any other nominees. Advisory Board from Alaska is closed. Idaho.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: There is no Delegate from Idaho.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Montana.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: I nominate Irvin Renz.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Any other nominees, any other nominees, any other nominees. Advisory Board from Montana is closed. Oregon.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: Mr. Chairman I nominate Peter Alward, Local 28.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Any other nominees, any other nominees, any other nominees. Advisory Board from Oregon is closed. State of Washington. This is for the Advisory Board.

         DELEGATE ALWARD LOCAL 28: I would like to nominate Floyd Hart.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Any other nominees, any other nominees, any other nominees. Advisory Board from Washington is closed and that's Floyd Hart.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Could we just say here since there is no opposition for the Advisory Board there will no election, if there is no objection. For Alaska, Denice Jewell of 918, none for Idaho, Montana, Irvin Renz of 379, Oregon, Peter Alward of 28, and for Washington, Floyd Hart of 15.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: OK, I'll accept that if that's OK with all of you. Legislative Committee, Alaska.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15. I nominate the Delegate from Alaska. Denice Jewell.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Any other nominees, any other nominees, any other nominees. That's closed Denice Legislative Committee. Idaho there is no Delegate. Montana.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28; I nominate Irvin Renz.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Any other nominees, any other nominees, any other nominees. If not that's closed Irvin Renz for Montana. Oregon.

         DELEGATE ALWARD LOCAL 28: I would like to nominate Elizabeth Rosenblath.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Any other nominees, any other nominees, any other nominees. If not that's closed Elizabeth Rosenblath for Oregon. State of Washington.

         DELEGATE BRYAN LOCAL 15: I would like to nominate Glen Gilbert.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Any other nominees, any other nominees, any other nominees. OK, Glen Gilbert Washington. OK, that takes care of those.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Since there is no opposition we could read the names: for Alaska, Denice Jewell of 918, none for Idaho, Montana, Irvin Renz of 339, Oregon, Elizabeth Rosenblath 675, State of Washington, Glen Gilbert of 675. So we will have an election for Secretary-Treasure is John DiSciullo and Thomas Watters. 0K, Election Committee come forward and we'll try and get this done. Who's the Chairman of the Election Committee?

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Friedli, Renz and Elizabeth.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: How many votes do we have? Is it thirteen? Am I correct on that?

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Thirteen votes.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: We have exactly thirteen ballots, is that correct?

         DELEGATE ROSENBLATT LOCAL 675: That is correct.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: So each person here is eligible to vote. We will vote by Local numbers. You will be given a ballot and just walk outside and mark your ballot. Then come back and put your ballot in the envelope. OK, first Local 15, Hart and Bryan, Local 28, DiSciullo and Alward, Spokane 93, Devereaux, 117, Stanovich, 154, Watters and Price, 175 Tacoma, Gilbert, 339, Renz, Missoula, 675 Eugene Oregon, Rosenblath, 887, Friedli, Seattle, last but no least 918, Anchorage, Jewell. Everybody voted?

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Why would either one of you guys want that goddamn job?

         GUEST GLYNNIS GREEN SPECIAL DEPARTMENT: Somebody got to do it.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: It's the prestige Floyd.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: You got a lot of prestige when you were business agent didn't you?

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: And I got a skin that thick to.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: Just remember when you get to the top of the list you're on the way out.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: I'm at the top.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: Just remember Floyd they never remember you for the good stuff only the bad.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: And I got scars that long.

         DELEGATE ROSENBLATH LOCAL 675: The votes are in and the numbers are counted. Mr. John DiSciullo is Secretary-Treasurer. The vote was nine to four. Here are the ballots. Do we need to hold on to them?

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Good luck John. So you have a new Secretary-Treasurer. Well be in Florida two years from now.

         DELEGATE BRYAN LOCAL 15: Is it for sure Florida?

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Yes, it is in the President's report.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: It will be in Hollywood Florida, the Diplomat.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: You want to install the officers: DiSciullo, Jewell, Renz, Alward, Hart, Rosenblath and Gilbert. Come forward. Secretary-Treasurer, Advisory Board, Legislative Committee.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: When I use my name use yours. I, Nick Long, do hereby pledge my word of honor to perform the duties of my office as set forth in the Constitution and By-Laws of this Union to the best of my ability and to bear true allegiance to the International Alliance. At the close of my official term, I solemnly promise that I shall deliver to my successor in office all books, papers and property of this Union and to the International Alliance which may be in my possession. To these promises I pledge you my word, fully realizing that to violate this pledge is to stamp me a person unworthy of trust. You have obligated yourself to faithfully and to the best of your ability discharge the duties of your office. You will now proceed to your station and perform the duties of that office and so conduct yourself as to be worthy of the trust reposed in you.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: I don't know how quickly you can take over this job. I know how the rules are; you are to proceed to your station.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: I'm not going to stay in your room to get all of the records.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: It will probably take a month or two or maybe another quarter to get all the records and see how I have done it and if you want to do any changes.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: I'll just come up.

         DELEGATE PRICE LOCAL 154: There's seven file cabinets.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: They may stay in Seattle.

         DELEGATE BRYAN LOCAL 15: He doesn't get the door that says District #1 on it does he?

         SECRETARY WATTERS: OK we have installed the officers. Under Good and Welfare let me say something if I might. I don't know if this is should have been somewhere else. When I took over this Office by being at several conventions, I did it mostly as our prior District Secretary had me all slated for this job and unfortunately he probably carried on too long because of his sickness. And I said I didn't say everything I wanted to in the District Secretary Report and I didn't because it would fill to many pages and make it appear that I blamed delegates and members and sometime I come out quite bluntly and say things I mean but they don't come out quite right. But somehow we have lost the unity in labor unions around and I always said to our members that the union, the District and the Alliance is not an entity but is people and that is what it is, you and I and people we represent. There are others out there we should reach and we have a big duty and obligation by not only finding the people who will make good union members, who want to work together for some goal, and also good workers. There's an old saying that good workers never have a problem finding a job. Another young fellow in the back told me a long time ago that good times breed poor union people and it's quite true. I mention in the end there that this job carries a great amount of responsibility and trust. I said that because I was aware of the situation. I know John has run for the job and I have enjoyed doing it and I wouldn't let it down and I wasn't going to decline cause I wanted you to make the decision and you have. I have done the best as I see it but that doesn't mean it's right. I will close with this, the District Death Benefit Fund does bother me and the reason I went the route that I did because I could not see any other way than to try and make it meaningful and yet keep in alive by making it worth while for the people. Because all you got to do is get one person that doesn't like the idea of changing the route and in this day and age with all the Federal Laws you can loose everything you have worked for in the past fifty years. Keep this in mind, you don't have to run scared, and we all run scared. I am very fond of the Alliance of this District and the Local I belong to. I believe in it. It worked for me and I hope it works for you. Good luck to you for those who carry on. APPLAUSE FROM ALL

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Well said.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a motion if it's all right with the body, that in this discussing of this District Insurance, if it's all right with the body, I would like to have Tommy Watters as one of the members of that Committee. Seeing he has been in longer than I have and I think it would be nice to hear his side of the story when we get into this.

         DELEGATE DEVEREAUX LOCAL 93: I'll second the motion.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: That's a good idea.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: I have no objection but just keep in mind that I'm only one person and this is the way I look at it and it's going to be decided by you people.

         DELEGATE DISCIULLO LOCAL 28: 1 know that, but you should be on it because of the time you have in the District.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: OK, we're on the motion, all in favor say I, opposed, carried. Anything else under good and welfare?

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: 1 would like to thank Tommy Watters for the work he's done during his time in office.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Anybody else.

         DELEGATE ROSENBLATH LOCAL 675: Good work Tommy.

         SECRETARY WATTERS: Thank you, I just did my job that's all.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Any thing else. I would like to thank Tommy also as he has helped with a lot of problems in just dealing with normal business of the local.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Anybody else. The next order will be the discharge of all-temporary officers and temporary committees.

         DELEGATE ALWARD LOCAL 28: Can we amend that to make the exception of the Insurance Committee?

         CHAIRMAN LONG: We will discharge all temporary officers and all temporary committees except the Insurance Committee. Any other business to come before this Convention?

         SECRETARY WATTERS: One thing before we adjourn, and I will shut up. Before adjournment, probably we should give a round of applause for Nick Long who chaired this meeting. APPLAUSE

         CHAIRMAN LONG: It's been my pleasure. My honor to sit here today and chair this Convention and it's been very enlightening bit of information for me. This has been my first chair since I have been a Vice President and I hope there will be more. It was very interesting and hope to come back again.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: We want you back.

         CHAIRMAN LONG: Thank You.

         DELEGATE HART LOCAL 15: Mr. Chairman, I move we adjourn.


         CHAIRMAN LONG: All those in favor of adjournment, say I, those opposed, adjourned.

         Meeting adjourned 4:20 P.M. Saturday, August 6, 1988

         DISTRICT NO. ONE, I.A.T.S.E. & M.P.M.O. of the U.S. & CANADA


Back to Top of Page

Home Page | Menu | District One History | General News
Education | Links | E-Mail John

Hit Counter
Visitors Since February 12, 1999

A Legends Production