Charges and Counter Charges, 1984

Online content

Fullscreen

Security and Law Enforcement Employees Council 62

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE, COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES AFL-CIO

63 COLVIN AVENUE, ALBANY, N.Y. 12206 PHONE 518/489-8424

September 2, 1983

Mr. Chester LaDuke
7 Miller Circle
Newburgh, New York 12550

Dear Chet:

Enclosed please find form-type letters which will assist
your Secretary/Treasurer or yourself in making out letters to

be sent to past Executive Board members and Trustees of Local
399 °

As you can see by these letters, they are requesting the
individuals to submit explanations along with receipts for the
items shown. If they do not submit acceptable supporting docu-
mentation to you or your Secretary/Treasurer by October 15, 1983,
all funds for which no explanation is given must be reimbursed
to the Local by the individuals.

I emphasize that the enclosed form letters should be retyped
on stationary from your local before sending the letters to the
individuals. I would also suggest that you send them to the
individuals by certified mail, return receipt requested.

Enclosed you will also find a list of sixteen names of
individuals in which the same documentation and receipts should
also be requested from them. I wish to point out that with each
individual request, you should attach a schedule of the dates and
checks so the individuals will know what is being requested of them.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.

Fraternally,

-ojohn W. Burke “VU

Executive Director

JWB/dmft
BNnCcs.
cc: Steve Fantauzzo

Mr. Vincent Di Giorgio

Dear Brother DiGiorgio,

In August 1983 the trustees of AFSCME Local 399 conducted an
audit of the local's books and records, covering the years 1979,
1980, 1981 and 1982. Only limited records and bank statements
were available to the trustees for purposes of the audit.

The trustees have identified numerous violations of the AFSCME
Financial Standards Code by Local 399. These include but are not
limited to 1) checks to cash, 2) failure to maintain minutes, 3) dis-
bursements without apparent authorization, 4) failure to maintain cash
receipt or disbursement books, 5) failure to file IRS form 990, and
6) failure to have a semi-annual audit of the records of the Local.
Local 399 maintained very few receipts and, further, does not have
any minutes to substantiate that the expenditures were properly
authorized. _ 7

, oa i nae
From 1979 through 1982 you received a total of $6,441,886 in
advances, allowances, reimbursements or checks to cash from Local

399. That total breaks down on an annual basis as follows:

LEO: IA
i979

- EU aoe ae check #1167 168.00) drawn to cash
—1980 - $475. including check #2227($45.00) drawn to cash
-1981 - $894.99

1982 - $4;923.00- including check #535 ($100.00) for auditing
“5740 of local books

I have attached e schedule of those checks. Please provide
explanations and receipts for each of the items shown. In the
absence of acceptable supporting documentation, all funds for which
no explanation is given must be reimbursed by you to the local.

Documentation should be provided to me no later than October 15,

1983. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.

Fraternally,

Secretary Treasurer
ce: Chester LaDuke
John Burke

Mr. Bruce Farrell

Dear Brother Farrell:

In August, 1983 the trustees of AFSCME Local 399 conducted an audit of
the local's books and records, covering the years 1979, 1980, 1981 and 1982.
Only limited records and bank statements were avilable to the trustees for
purposes of the audit.

The trustees have identified numberous violations of the AFSCME Financial
Standards Code by Local 399. These include but are not limited to: 1.) checks
to cash, 2.) failure to maintain minutes, 3.) disbursements without apparent
authorization, 4.) failure to maintain cash receipt or disbursement books,

5.) failure to file IRS form 990, and 6.) failure to have a semi-annual audit

of the records of the Local. Local 399 maintains very few receipts and, further,

does not have any minutes to substantiate that the expenditures were properly

authorized. _—
CUE)

From 1979 through 1982 you received a total of $@05t-31-fth advances, allow-
ances, reimbursements and checks to cash. The total breaks down on an annual
basis as follows:

1979 - $868.48 oe |
_— 1980 - 2420.03, including $300.00 to cash (check #153) and $200.00 to
[F2£0:¢S cash (check #184)
1981 - 4542738, including $600.00 to cash (check #304); $35.46 for local
FI¥!3§ auditing (check #375) and $50.00 for local auditing
(check #377).
- 1982 228r49.

receipts for each of the items shown. In the absence of acceptable supporting
documentation, all funds for which no explanation is given must be reimbursed
by you to the local.

Documentation should be provided to me no later than October 15, 1983. If
you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.

Fraternally,

Secretary-Treasurer

cc: Chester LaDuke
John Burke

Mr. Marion Dantzler

Ff
(a
Fz
,

Dear Brother Dantzler:

In August 1983 the trustees of AFSCME Local 399 conducted an audit of the
local's books and records, covering the years 1979, 1980, 1981 and 1982. Only
limited records and bank statements were available to the trustees for purposes
of the audit.

The trustees have identified numerous violations of the AFSCME Financial
Standards Code by Local 399. These include but are not limited to: 1.) checks
to cash, 2.) failure to maintain minutes, 3.) disbursements without apparent
authorization, 4.) failure to maintain cash receipt or disbursement books,

5.) failure to file IRS form 990, and 6.) failure to have a semi-annual audit of

the reocrds of the Local. Local 399 maintained very few receipts and, further, does

not have any minutes to substantiate that the ane 7% were properly authorized.
47498

From 1979 through 1982 you received a total of $786-86-in allowances and
reimbursements. That total breaks down on an annual basis as follows:

N1979 - $53.66_ 266, /0
—— 1980 - $603.28>7 including $17.10 for local auditing (check #225)

reel = $ 80.00, including $50.00 for local auditing (check #376)
A 1982 - $ 50.00

I have attached a schedule of those checks. Please provide explanations
and receipts for each of the items shown. In the absence of acceptable supporting
documentation, all funds for which no explanation is given must be reimbursed

by you to the local.

Documentation should be provided to me no later than October 15, 1983. If .
you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.

Fraternally,

Secretary-Treasurer

cc: Chester LaDuke
John Burke

Mr. Raymond Tettier

Dear Brother Tettier,

In August 1983 trustees of AFSCME Local 399 conducted an
audit of the local's books and records, covering the years 1979,
1980, 1981 and 1982. Only limited records and bank statements
were available to the trustees for purposes of the audit.

. The trustees have identified numerous violations of the AFSCME
Financial Standards Code by Local 399. These include but are not
limited to 1) checks to cash, 2) failure to maintain minutes, 3) dis-
bursements without apparent authorization, 4) failure to maintain cash
receipt or disbursement books, 5) failure to file IRS form 990, and
6) failure to have a semi-annual audit of the records of the Local.
Local 399 maintained very few receipts and, further, does not have
any minutes to substantiate that the expenditures were properly
authorized. — at

Aon i ic /
ap. Pll , 4 en :

QIK “7 During 1981 you received $175.00 and during 1982 you received

$2,845-67 in advances, allowances or reimbursements from Local 399.
I have attached a schedule of those checks. Please provide explanations
and teceipts for each of the items shown. In the absence of acceptable
supporting documentation, all funds for which no explanation is given
must be reimbursed by you to the local. .

Documentation should be provided to me no later than October 15,
1983. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.

Fraternally,

Secretary Treasurer

ce: Chester LaDuke
John Burke

Mr. Ralph Cook

Dear Brother Cook:

any minutes to substantiate that the expenditures were properly
authorized.

During 1980 you received $889.29 in advances, allowances oT
reimbursements from Local 399. I have attached a schedule of those
checks. Please provide explanations and receipts for each of the items
shown. In the absence of acceptable supporting documentation, all

funds for which no explanation is given must be reimbursed by you to
the local.

Documentation should be provided to me no later than October 15,
1983. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.

Fraternally,

Secretary Treasurer

ec: Chester LaDuke
John Burke

Mr. Guy Hinkson

Dear Brother Hinkson,

authorized. rare Oe
Be Sook ee

‘
Ld f

‘ { i
From 1980 through 1982 you received a total of $538-8@ in advances,
allowances, or reimbursements from Local 399. That total breaks down
on an annual basis as follows:

“1980 - $45.00
—1981 - $50.00 —
~1982 - Sd43r80 SCEINO

I have attached a schedule of those checks. Please provide
explanations and receipts for each of the items shown. In the

absence of acceptable supporting documentation, all funds for which
no explanation is given must be reimbursed by you to the local.

Documentation should be provided to me no later than October 15,
1983. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.

Fraternally,

Secretary Treasurer

cc: Chester LaDuke
John Burke

PERSON AMOUNT
William Carrol: $225.00
Harry Leonhardt” 110.00
“Real Bouffard f/ 80.00
<toward Reese v 110.00
\Daniel Lenihan 246.50
‘Ralph Andredez 52-00
R. Quicksell ( 60.00
: Z (Jer77
“William Byrnes’ 232750
“William Byrnes” 100.00
\Joseph Ventrice G5: 25 -290+25-
\Joseph Ventrice 160.00
\Frang Colich 100.00
NR. Bentley 20.00
Mervin tteshexr £8-60-—
Marvin-Fie 167=70-"
~ Ronald LaDuke 150.00
Raymond MacDermott 150.00
\ Mike Rooney 0 0.0 0488-80-

Ny. Terwilliger 150.00

LOCAL 399

JUSTIFICATION

—

#219 made to cash

#305 made to ca
#408 local audit,
#5721 local audits CHF

DOWNSTATE
CORRECTIONAL
FACILITY

President
C. LaDuKE

Vice President
. LaRocca

Secretary

-\R. LaDuke ©

Treasurer
M. Cooper

Executive Board

R. ANDRADEZ
H. CHIN

Trustee
J. TERWILLIGER
R. FIsKE

J. FLAHERTY
a

4 e x

DOWNSTATE CORRECTION OFFICERS
LOCAL 399

RED SCHOOLHOUSE ROAD
FISHKILL, NEW YORK 12524

COUNCIL 82
A.F.S.C ME.
AK. Lite 1G.

September 9, 1983

MINUTES OF MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 8, 1983.

* oft =

Meeting called to order at 7:50 P.M. 5 Executive Board
and 58 Members present. _ 7

President LaDuke requested Vice-President LaRocca and
Secretary LaDuke read the Audit Report to the membership-
this was done. President LaDuke then read a letter from the
Executive Director, Mr. John Burke, which directed President
LaDuke to send, by Certified mail, aletter stating: 1. How
much the Officer received in Union Funds,2. that he must
either produce a receipt,for or an explaination of or return
the said funds no later than October 15, 1983. These letters
were sent to approx. 23 Members or former Members.

Discussion on the Audit Report lasted approx. two (2)
hours.

Motion made by Brother Cook, seconded by Brother Bouffard
stating that,"Whatever explaination is forth coming from the
Members who received the Certified letters be accepted by
President LaDuke as a full and acceptable explaination.”
During the discussion on the motion, President LaDuke stated,
"I cannot speak for a higher authority, every since the Trustees

-completed the Audit and it was sent to the Council and AFSCME

International, it has been out of our hands. When the higher
authority is satisfied then the Audit is over.” Motion carried.
{Later ruling by Council 82 and AFSCME International that
motion to curtaii 2n Audit is illegal and so ruled the motion
as such.

Page 2
MINUTES OF.MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 8, 1983 (Con't)

Brather Rooney made motion, seconded by Brother B. Patrice that,"The
Minutes of all Union Meetings be posted on Union B.B." Motion carried.

(Later ruling by Council 82 and AFSCME International stated that said
motion would be construed as the Union working in collaboration with the
~ ‘Administration as the Union B.B. are in an area where they can be read not

only by the Administration but also by the Inmates. The motion was therefor
ruled out of order.) The Minutes therefor will be read at the next meeting ©

and either approved, corrected and approved or disapproved.

Motion made by Sister B. LaDuke, seconded by Brother LaRocca, that
meeting be adjourned- Motion carried. Meeting adjourned at ll: s02 P.M.

Respectfully submitted,

i bona Ld fee

- Ronald LaDuke,Secretary
Local 399

ce: Union Files

STATE OF NEW YORK
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD

In the Matter of :

STATE OF NEW YORK, DEPARTMENT OF $
CORRECTIONAL SERVICES and STATE OF
NEW YORK, OFFICE OF EMPLOYEE RELATIONS, : NOTICE OF

MOTION FOR
Respondents, : INTERVENTION
- and - H
THE UNION OF FEDERATED CORRECTION : Case No.
OFFICERS, U-7385

Charging Party.

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that upon the annexed affidavit of
Brian J. O'Donnell sworn to April 5, 1984, the undersigned
hereby moves the Public Employment Relations Board for an order
granting New York State Inspection, Security and Law Enforce-
ment Employees, District Council 82, American Federation of
State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO, as bargaining
agent for the employees in the Security Services Bargaining
Unit of the State of New York for permission to intervene in
the above-captioned proceeding and to consolidate it with PERB
Case No. U-7375.

DATED: April 5, 1984
Albany, New York
ROWLEY, FORREST AND
O'DONNELL P.C.
Attorneys for Intervenor
Office and P.O. Address
90 State Street

Albany, New York 12207
(518) 434-6187

STATE OF NEW YORK
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD

In the Matter of | :

STATE OF NEW YORK, DEPARTMENT OF $
CORRECTIONAL SERVICES and STATE OF
NEW YORK, OFFICE OF EMPLOYEE RELATIONS, :

Respondents, : AFFIDAVIT
- and - :
THE UNION OF FEDERATED CORRECTION $ Case No.
OFFICERS, U-7385

Charging Party.

STATE OF NEW YORK )
COUNTY OF ALBANY )

BRIAN J. O'DONNELL, being duly sworn, deposes and says
thate

1. I am an attorney duly licensed to practice Lae in the
State of New York. I am a member of Rowley, Forrest and
O'Donnell P.C., attorneys for New York State Inspection,
Security and Law Enforcement Employees, District Council 82,
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees,
AFL-CIO (hereinafter Council 82). I make this affidavit in
support of the application of Council 82 to intervene in this
proceeding and to consolidate this proceeding with PERB Case
No. U-7375.

2. Council 82 is the employee organization duly certified
as the exclusive representative of the employees in the New
York State Security Services Bargaining Unit and is a party to

a collective bargaining agreement covering those employees

until March 31, 1985.

3. Council 82 has a right to unchallenged representation
status pursuant to N.Y. Civil Service Law, Section 208.

4. The State of New York has promulgated Uniform Rules
and Regulations governing elections and campaigns for certifica-
tion in the New York State bargaining units, a copy of which
are annexed to the proposed answer as Exhibit 1.

5. Upon information and belief the facts alleged in this
charge also constitute the basis for the charge in PERB Case
No. U-7375.

6. Upon information and belief PERB's determination o£
this proceeding by any other means than dismissal of the charge
will necessarily affect Council 82's rigtte + unchallenged
representation status and its rights under its collective
bargaining agreement with the State of New York.

7. I am enclosing with this affidavit a proposed answer
to the charge in: Case U-7385. I respectfully request the -
Public Employment Relations Board to grant an order permitting
Council 82 to intervene in this proceeding and to consolidate

this proceeding with PERB Case No. 7375.

Sworn to before me this
Cth, day of April, 1984.

NOTARY PUBLIC

y Public, State of N
Qualified in Rensselaer ae
_ _ No. 4759936
Commission Expires Narch 30. 19.34

STATE OF NEW YORK
PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD

In the Matter of :

STATE OF NEW YORK, DEPARTMENT OF :
CORRECTIONAL SERVICES and STATE OF
NEW YORK, OFFICE OF EMPLOYEE RELATIONS,

INTERVENOR'S

Respondents, : ANSWER
- and - :
THE UNION OF FEDERATED CORRECTION : Case No.

OFFICERS, (U-7385
Charging Party,
- and -
NEW YORK STATE INSPECTION, SECURITY
AND LAW ENFORCEMENT EMPLOYEES, DISTRICT
COUNCIL 82, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF
STATE, COUNTY AND MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEES,
AFL-CIO,

Intervenor.

Intervenor, by its attorneys, Rowley, Forrest and
O'Donnell P.C., for its answer to the charge in this
proceeding:

1. Admits the allegations contained in paragraphs "7",
"13" and "19".

2. Denies the allegations contained in paragraphs "20",
"36", "27", "28" and *29".

3. Denies knowledge sufficient to form a belief as to the
allegations contained in paragraphs "1", "2", "3", "9", "10",
cig", @15", %16", "17", "18", "22", "23". ana "28".

4. With respect to paragraphs "4", "5" and "6" of the

charge, intervenor denies the allegations and respectfully

refers the Public Employment Relations Board to its rules and
regulations for their content and meaning.

5. With respect to paragraph "8" of the charge, inter-
venor admits that on or about March 4, 1984 Officers Farrell
and McKinney were soliciting cards pursuant to the allegations
contained in paragraph "7" of the charge and denies knowledge
sufficient to form a belief as to each and every other allega-
tion contained in paragraph "8".

6. With respect to paragraph "14" of the charge, inter-
venor admits its sLisgat Lane, denies that the quoted portion @é
the State's rules and regulations are the only pertinent part
of those rules and regulations and ranpeckfally refers the
Public Employment Relations Board to the rules and regulations
of the State of New York governing elections and campaigns
contained in the Employee Relations Manual issued May, 1975, a
copy of which is annexed to this answer as Exhibit l.

7. With respect to paragraph "25" of the charge, inter-
venor denies the allegations and respectfully refers the Public
Employment Relations Board to the document attached to the
charge as Exhibit B for its content and meaning.

8. With respect to paragraphs "12" and "21" of the
charge, the intervenor repeats and realleges its answers to the
other paragraphs of the charge cited therein with the same
force and effect as if each were more fully set forth herein.

WHEREFORE, the intervenor respectfully requests that PERB:

Ls dismiss the improper practice charge in proceeding

U-7385;
2. grant an order directing the respondents to comply

with their rules and regulations contained in the Employee

Relations Manual annexed to this answer as Exhibit 1;

3. grant an order denying Charging Party the right to use
petitions or cards obtained in violation of the rules and
regulations annexed to this answer as Exhibit 1, specifically
denying Charging Party the right to use such petitions or cards
as were solicited at job sites prior to the start of the
campaign period provided in Rule 12.3;

4, grant the intervenor such other and further relief as
to the Board may seem just and proper.

DATED: April 5, 1984 ROWLEY, FORREST AND
O'DONNELL P.C.
Attorneys for Intervenor
Office and P.O. Address
90 State Street

Albany, New York 12207

(518) 434-6187
STATE OF NEW YORK )

) sS.:
COUNTY OF ALBANY )

THOMAS INGLEE, being duly sworn, deposes and says that he
is the Treasurer of New York State Inspection, Security and Law
Enforcement Employees, District Council 82, American Federation
of State, County and Municipal Employees, AFL-CIO, the
unincorporated association seeking intervention in the within
proceeding; that he has read the foregoing Answer and knows the
contents thereof; that the same is true to his own knowledge,
except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on
information and belief, and as to those matters he believes it
to be true. oO

THOMAS INGLEE 4

Sworn to before me this
6“tday of April, 1984.

Box JEL

NOTABY PUBLIC

os
ata ae

EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT
= OFFICE OF EMPLOYEE RELATIONS

MAY 1975

SECTION 12

ELECTIONS

Table of Contents

Position of the State .....--seeeeeeeereeee
Names and Addresses of Employees ....-..-

Campaign Period, Commencement of ..;.--.

Access to Employees for Campaign Purposes

Use of State Facilities for Meetings ......-.

Organizational Activities by Employees ...

.
-

Use of Bulletin Boards .........eeeeeceees

Organizational Activities by Nonemployees

EMPLOYEE RELATIONS MANUAL gre ee ee Sages ana

Posting of Organizational Materials ........--

Utilization of Agency Communications Systems

Procedures for Handling Complaints .......--

rec ete ee SITS iy bo 6 So
eS AG Se Naty Re tng Pe

ES Se ey St PAS 3 wh 5 beats P=
Ps Cae es : -

pa
~ ~

SAT awe
Pe

cevecevceccesse 123
ioe mas w vote mw nwe LES
suse veioey<es 128
cs tin ema ever ass TOA
ceerreeesasasnn BOM
leceseeseeeesee 124
veceeseeveecees 124

=< onthe 03
oT ade Sa ee

aS:

eri tT te
caw ae ee ee
iieeKe nero neew See

ee
SSS

bs es, oa
SIP tne es

Pace 12.2 May 1975

EmpLoYEeE ReLaTions MANUAL

9 GUIDELINES FOR
ORGANIZATIONAL ACTIVITIES AND CAMPAIGNS

1. Position of the State. Employees have the right under Section 202
of the Taylor Law to form, join and participate in, or to refrain from
forming, joining or participating in, any employee organization of their
own choosing. Employee organizations have the derivative right to under-
take to persuade public employees to engage in organizational activities,
including the signing of authorization cards and election petitions.

The State’s position is one of neutrality during organizational
campaigns, pre-election periods and the election process. Management/
confidential employees shall not use their official positions to help or
hinder employee organizational campaigns or activities, nor shall man-
agement/confidential employees permit employees under their super-
vision to use their official positions to help or hinder such activities.

The State shall not harass, coerce, promise or give special treatment
to employees in an effort to influence them to join or support a particular
employee organization or to participate in its activities. Management/
confidential employees shall not distribute material or any information
to any employee organization or interrogate any employee concerning

&) his or her organizational activities. .

* Organizational activities by employee organizations must be con-
ducted so as not to interfere with the safe and efficient conduct of State
operations and the discharge of work responsibilities by State employees.
The State shall take appropriate action to prevent the violation of these
guidelines by any person acting on behalf of an employee organization.

2. Requests for Lists of Names and Addresses of Employees and
Related Information. Lists of names and addresses of employees and
related information demanded for organizational purposes will not be
released by any department, agency or board. Agencies receiving requests
for such lists should transmit them to OER. OER will provide such infor-
mation to all employee organizations, incumbents and challengers alike,
upon request and appropriate charges for such lists will be made. An
employee organization shall be provided such information unless there
is substantial evidence that the organization is seeking this information
for purposes unrelated to organizational activities among the employees

in the negotiating unit involved.

ie
At
-

x a RAT
Fs Se ee
» ~ Load

ole

Poy eS
-+ .

tats
ene

O) eS,
mo

2 SaaS ex 4 2 =
7 oa Le ww.

May 1975

EMPLOYEE RELATIONS MANUAL Pace 12.3

3. Policy of Nondiscrimination Between Incumbent Organizations and
Challenging Organizations. All organizations shall have equal access to
employees for campaign purposes, i.e., soliciting memberships, distribut-
ing literature, obtaining signatures on authorization cards and petitions

-- and related activities during a campaign period. When an employee

iy PRS Yb hed bin aes
EC REIN ta

whe
Wy on

organization has been recognized or certified as the representative of oe
j jati i i ; : Bae
the employees in a negotiating unit, the campaign period shall begin no ae
FS

ais

earlier than 90 days prior to the date upon which the incumbent organi-

zation’s representation status is subject to challenge under Section 208

of the Taylor Law.
4. Use of State Facilities for Meetings. The State will not make meet-
areas which it owns or leases available to an

ing space in buildings or
r campaign purposes (as defined above in

employee organization fo
subdivision 3) except under the following conditions: (a) suitable space
’s not reasonably available elsewhere in the area, (b) the employee
orgenizatién reimburses the State for any costs which the State incurs
as a result of making such space available, and (c) the organization
requests the use of such space in advance, pursuant to the rules of the

department or agency concerned.
No employee shall be released from work for the purpose of attend-

-
-

ing such meetings.

5. Organizational Activities in an Agency by Employees of That
Agency. Discussions between and among such employees concerning
organizational activities, the solicitation of organizational support, and
the distribution of membership and authorization cards and organiza-
Honal literature during nonworking hours and in nonworking areas, such
as lounges, restaurants and cafeterias, are permissible. Such activities
shall not impair the safe and eflicient conduct of :the operation, nor shall
they interfere with work duties or work performance.

6. Organizational Activities in an Agency by Employees of Some
Other Agency or Persons not Employed by the State. Such per-
cons shall have access to employees for the purpose of soliciting member-
ships, distributing literature, obtaining signatures on authorization cards,
and other organizational activities in parking lots, entrances to buildings,
and other areas to which members of the public are admitted, provided

oe we ad ; -. : s pean ° Pee th,
een ge a = 5 ee + ‘ ty pete ot nome BH oF .
Da~ re ve) <0 — > * sie Fe Si +s r =e (foe as v manos ot LS . r%, a = sy
3 Des Sy aia PATS Weitges IVER TEENS See PERS see sviees
Se Dore Sa rey oes Kt BSS tee ares bc, .eKratk =
- o> be ES ah Per a = net nga peat PT. eS ee
a Same PORE od SEMEN ENE ae Oe
ge Fh Pace” * a ta
* ~> >

aSy Se

ail peat * . 4p (fe ~
SEER Eas ARE

~ ia Ss =
= Sate oS NY ee ean ne

Re ay ae Evy
SARS atch

Pace 12.4 May 1975

ExpLorEE ReLaTions MaNuab

that such activities do not inhibit the movement of people or vehicles,
impair the safe and efficient conduct of the cperation, or interfere with
work duties or work performance.

Employee organizations shall be permitted to set up manned tables
sn such areas during normal working hours subject to the proviso set

: forth above.

7. Use of Bulletin Boards, Posting of Organizational Materials, and
Utilization of Agency Communications Systems. The policy of nondis-
crimination set forth in subdivision 3 above shall be applicable to the
use of bulletin boards and the posting of materials for campaign pur-
poses (as defined in subdivision 3 above.)

Meeting notices and other organizational materials shall not be
hung upon, posted or otherwise afixed to the walls, doors, windows or
other appurtenances of facilities and buildings owned or leased by the
State. The State’s inter- and intra-agency ofice mail, messenger, repro-
duction and similar facilities shall not be used for the distribution or
duplication of organizational materials.

eet deel

s: PROCEDURES FOR HANDLING COMPLAINTS

~ => Agencies should designate responsible officials at the local level to
= receive initial complaints at that level. The employee organization will
be asked to direct the complaints, insofar as possible, to the appropriate

> level. Complaints should be addressed in the first instance to the local
3 level. If the institution or local designee cannot dispose of the problem
or has any questions as to how to handle it, he should request advice of
3 the agency central office designee. If the central office designee cannot
ce dispose of the complaints or would like advice from OER as to the State’s

3 policy with respect to the complaint, the matter should be referred to
rs OER. When calling OER, the designee should state that he is a central
-3 designee and wishes to consult about campaign practices. He will be
pf referred promptly to the appropriate OER staff member.

‘a If one of the local or central office’s designees has disposed of a
a complaint which he feels is particularly significant, a report of such
+3 disposition should be sent to OER.

In connection with the disposition of complaints, local supervision
; should exercise its best judgment in applying the following guidelines:

E 1. Disposition of complaints should be handled quickly by informal
4 contacts, such as a telephone call or, if essential, by an informal meeting
- of as small a group as is necessary to dispose of the matter.

Pace 12.5 May 1975

ExpLovee ReLaTions MANUAL

2. The general standards for disposition are (a) even-handed treat-
ment of interested employee organizations, (b) avoidance of annoyance
to the public and (c) avoidance of interference with the agency's

operation.

awk

“Ge” Lae

al
a eae Het E eae aeiey $7 a abs
ee ee i) * pe ~ paren Rr Oh ers ok
™=S Be te * Rs =~ :¥ ay, ¢ oe Sex barn PO ee 4 = Y Sal & Tet
PP gph Ee ad ig MS, “ma" be, as pe Se rere Ne a OS Ret eo ee tae ras ‘ wy
dS ee ey eras ree pete: geese BERK Teer ES be PRS aes a Pat arte
~ == RA : ee Sc 2 reo = ae . Ps ¢ OF =f ace 7 d axe iio 3 Oy =e 2-4
T Phe Ae Pee sie ee LIAS pot Oe Sa ES Stereo AS. rey ‘2 a ete Oise SE Ma ASE
ae oa : ws = Sere ae
~ sa

ger F arte

TUFCO QUESTIONS

If an Association, who are you associated with?

How

_ How

How

will your Union be governed?
soon after your challenge can I run for president?
do I get nominated?

will TUFCO people be appointed?

What members (direct or otherwise) have input to this elite selection

process of TUFCO?

When you sign a TUFCO card, how do you know you are not joining their

Union organization?

didn't TUFCO people bring their ideas to Council 82?

aren't the TUFCO people still part of Council 82?

are TUFCO people self-appointed for 5 year terms?

won't the TUFCO people provide members with copies of bylaws and
the constitution?

don't the TUFCO people comply with the will of the majority (voted
out) of Council? |

does TUFCO want to keep the same dues structure? .

staff with outside business agents?

does TUFCO only express concern for correction officers?

does the TUFCO information not have a Union label - Union made?

does the TUFCO people want to get rid of local unions?

can workers be represented by non-working business agents?

is TUFCO run by Sergeants?

will each member have 1 vote?

will the Director and Associate Director be selected?

,7*

How much would it cost for a professional negotiator?

How much would it cost for regional offices and staff?

How would TUFCO get better benefits in State Contract?

What issues can they improve on? How?

Why did Fitzpatrick and Morrissey negotiate against Union brothers in
Council 66?

Why did Fitzpatrick, as a Local President in Comstock, write up a
transportion sergeant?

Why did Kevin Casey leave negotiations in 1979?

Why did Kevin Casey go to Vermont at start of strike?

Why was Fitzpatrick in Las Vegas at start of strike?

Why did Fitzpatrick get his strike fines back?

Why did Morrissey and Fitzpatrick use Assistant Deputy Commissioner
Coleman, the Governor's Office of Employee Relations Director,
Sandy Frucher, and the President of the Catskill Village Board,
Joe Izzo, for references in their negotiating services resumes?

Why was a $500,000 lawsuit filed against Morrissey at Auburn?

Who is paying the expenses of the TUFCO leaders throughout the State?

Why is the United Federation of Correction Officers paying the expenses
for the Union of Federated Correction Officers?

Why did the TUFCO leaders file Union charges against Council 82 for
1 man, 1 vote on 1982-1985 Contract?

Where would the money come from for offices, staff, professional nego-
tiations, insurance, benefits, servicing Contract?

Why didn't TUFCO leaders assist in lobbying days to save Brentwood?

What is TUFCO's Legislative Program?

How would this be done?

Would TUFCO support legislation for non-correction groups?

Would TUFCO be responsible for the loss of dues check-off?

Would TUFCO call for a strike to save. contract benefits (i.e., Sen-

Why

iority, Job Bidding, oeanaters, Worker's Comp., New Hires
Personal Leave and Sick Leave)?

did Titepeteiek as a Staff Rep of Council 82 settle a Discipline
(Ford) Loss of Peace Officer Status for 2 years?

did Fitzpatrick and Meehan refuse to return $150 each to the Ser-
geants Local after the Council 82 convention when the Vice
President and Treasurer of the Sergeants Local complied with
the vote of the Executive Board?

did Fitzpatrick quit as a Council 82 Staff Rep?

did Farrell quit the Negotiating Committee in 1982?

did Morrissey quit as Local President of Auburn?

did Morrissey quit as a Representative of Q.W.L.?

did Fitzpatrick quit as a Representative of Q.W.L.?

IMPROVEMENTS BY COUNCIL 82

brief look at the positive improvements by Council 82 in the past year:

Health insurance for our members.was finalized with small cost
‘increases for our os

Optical plan a first to all our members.

Training seminars for Union leaders were conducted state-wide.
O.S.H.A. upheld Council 82 position on outdated tear gas in many
correction facilities.

_ Council 82 was the first Union to protest the actions of the State
concerning A.I.D.S. inmates.

Council 82 filed O.S.H.A. complaints on A.I.D.S.

Strike fines returned to 278 of our members.

More field staff hired to lessen the work load and expand Council
services (total of eight).

Legislation assistant hired on a full time basis.

Public relations specialist hired on a full time basis whose duties
also include the full responsibility for the Council 82 Review.
Legal assistants hired to assist our three full time ateoomers

As a result of Council 82 actions on "overcrowding", the State
continues to expand and has increased the funding by the legislature.
On the legislative side, the Council did support Cuomo for Governor.
The fruits of this was shown when we needed a message of necessity
by the Governor, otherwise soxrrection officers would have been
left out completely by the legislature for Tier III retirement
improvements.

Legislation by the Council on Long Island Correctional Facility was

not passed, but with lobbying efforts and continued pressure, the

deadline has been extended to October 1, 1984. (Court action possi-

ble.)

Council 82 will. be expanding the Legislative Action Committee's
concept state-wide to all locals.

Council 82, through negotiations with The Governor's Office of
Employee Relations, reduced the impact of lay-offs within our units. |
Council 82's negotiations with The a Office of Employee
Relations also upgraded the starting salary and six month salary

for trainees in the Department of Correctional Services from

$12,580 to $14,200, 6 months $15,000.

Many more improvements are forthcoming in the future. The Council
has expanded their office space, will be putting im a computer
operation April of 1984, starting a retiree chapter for former
employees, and several other concepts are being discussed for
further improvements to our members (i.e., Scholarship Fund,

Death Benefit Insurance, Awards Program, Phone Bank System. for
Legislative Committees)... .

Deferred pay arbitration continues and will probably be finalized
this summer.

A consulting firm, Arthur Young Associates, was selected for our
reclassification study.

Legal action continues on the Military Leave issue.

The E.A.P. Program and Q.W.L. continue to — and improve.
Establishment of a Camps Training Advisory Committee.
Establishment of Paleo assis eet Committees for the Department of

Correctional Services Training Academy.

Establishment of E.A.P. Advisor for new hires of the Department

~
~_ =

of Correction Services.

Another request for 1984 to upgrade correction officer trainees

to GR 14 hiring rate.

New N.O.D. Procedure for disciplines.

Professor Peter Wickham's survey of correction officers' attitudes.

Training tape on A.I.D.S.- with a doctor from Alanta Disease Control

Center.
Worker's compensation day 1 coverage.
Seniority and job bidding provisions intact.
Five personal leave days for new hires.
Thirteen sick leave days for new hires.
Time and attendance cases are still processed under Article 8 of
the Contract.
New York State/Council 82 Quality of Work Life has funded the
following improvements to the members of Council 82:
1. Employee Activity Centers
2. Weight lifting equipment
3. Officers mess equipment and furnishings
4. Air conditioning and ventilation
5. Officer locker rooms
6. Showers for officers
7. Athletic equipment (teams and individuals)
8. Health and stress programs
9, Police Olympus (correction officer participation)
10. Kitchen equipment
11. Microwave ovens and refrigerators for hot meals
12. Driver training (reduces insurance rates and removes marks
on license)

13. Pavilions

‘3

14.-. Picnic areas

15. Athletic ball fields

16. Employee recreation areas

Lis Employee housing

18. Hostage Survival Training

19. Hazardous Device geaiting

20. Labor Management Seminars

21. Health Risk Appraisal

22. Slide presentation to improve the correction officers' image
23. Exercise programs :

24. Food coops

25. E.A.P. assistance a.

26. Ongoing programs to inhance the working conditions and

image of all: employees

This list is a random sampling of funded projects.

COMPARE THESE BENEFITS WITH TUFCO

MAJOR 82 BILLS:

1.
2
Ds

14.

LS -
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.

BS«

24.

25.

Omnibus peace officer bill (benefit to 85% of 82 membership)
25 year half pay - no age requirement - correction officers

Retain Article 14 E.R.S. and eliminate social security dis-
ability requirement and own retirement section.

Indemnification of all State employees in State and Federal
courts both criminal and civil. .

Defeating the volunteer police bill which could forseeably
mean the loss of up to 75% of our city, town, and village
police officers. | | |

Retaining the 50,000 death benefit of our members from the
Federal program.

Mandatory training of county correction officers for permanent
and part-time officers.

Consecutive sentence on assault of correction officers.
Peace officer status for S.H.T.A. (limited)

Appearance tickets - University Public Safety Officers
Appearance tickets - Safety Officers

Reinstatement of funds for violent felony warrant program -
Deputy Sheriffs. |

Reinstatement of funds for statewide deputy sheriffs for
navigation and snowmobile enforcement programs.

Soft body armor for Encon Police, Capital Police, State Park
Police, and Correction Cert teams.

Physical screening for correction officers.

21 year age limit - correction officers.

Political activities for police officers.

Budget reinstatement of 50 Forest Rangers. -
207C of General Municipal Law for County Correction Officers.

Defeating the City of Albany Police Residency Bill.

Defeat of the attempted implementing of correctional service hiring

and rules under ex-type law.

additional training for safety officers above C.P.L. requirement.

Police officer status - State Park Police, 25 year half pay - State
Park Police and reclass of 4 grades (in 1972) for 5 regions of the S

Parks Office. Also reopener of 375H of P&F Retirement Plan.

Increase of vehicle allotment for patrol vehicles for Encon Police,

Park Police and University P.S.O.

Many changes in the Penal Law and Criminal Procedure Law on bills
that aid our members in the ability to perform their duties with

safety, dignity and professionalism.

Pare 1 of

CORRECTION OFFI

14 Pages

DOWNSTATE CERS

te
FINOAY 2
Beat ad CAL 99
a
RED SCHOCLHOUSE RQAD
FISHKILL, NEW YORK 12524
DOWNSTATE ,
CORRECTIONAL COUNCIL 82
FACILITY A. F. S.C. M.E.
A.F.E,.- Ege
President
QR%
C. LADuUKE lel 1 JOD
nieeereeprae To: Members of Local 399 °
G. Hinxson <= a =
Be ee | 3 ¢
Sriceenits from: Trustees, Local 399
R. LaRocca subject: Audit of Financial Records for Local 399 AFSOMRE
Treasurer
M. Cooper
Executive Board
a Brothers and Sisters:
H. CHIN :
The following is the Audit Report for Local 299, dating
Trustee
J. TERWILLICER from April 1979 thru December 14, 1982,
R. FISKE
J. FLAHERTY
This Audit was conducted according to the "Financial
Standards Code", as, set forth by APSCME, AFL-CIO.
Respectfully submitted,
J. Terwilliger, Trustee ae oy
- <) |r
R, Fiske, Trustee Vy. +1${Ce_-
4
Lg 5
J. Flaherty, Es ey
#
ae
re 8 ee Seer a ee ————— a puptiieclitditindiineeciinsemnscmeecmtiaimeniens

.. Page 2 of 14 Pages
| 19°79
‘Records from Check Book ONLY Beginning With Check # 101 Dated 6/20/79

Thru Check # 152 Dated 12/17/79. NO OTHER RECORDS AVAILABLE.

CASH RECEIPTS:
1) NO CASH RECEIPTS BOOK,
NO DEPOSIT SLIPS.
NO BANK STATEMENTS,
2) NO DOCUMENTATION OF CASH RECEIVED
NO PER CAPITA REPORTS FROM COUNCIL 82, WERE RETAINED BY LOCAL

NO CASH RECEIPTS BOOK
4) NO CASH RECEIPTS BOOK
5) NO RECORD OF DEPOSITS IN THE CHECK BOOK.

|
CASH DISBURSEMENTS :
| 1) NO BANK STATEMENTS.
2) NO CASH DISBURSEMENT BOOK
CANCELLED CHECKS DO COMPARE WITH CHECK BOOK.
3) NO CASH DISBURSEMENT BOOK
PAYEE ON CHECK SAME AS CHECKBOOK,

4) ENDORSEMENT AGREES WITH THE PAYEE.

5) SIGNATURES ON CHECKS SIGNED BY OFFICERS
NO VALID LOCAL CONSTITUTION. of
NO INVOICES

NO EXPENSE REPORTS.

OY’
aT

7) SAME AS # 6 ABOVE.

8) NO CASH DISBURSEMENT ROOK.
9) SAME AS #8 ABOVE,
10) BALANCE CARRIED IN CHECKBOOK USED ONLY FOR NINE ENTRIZS.

BANK RECONCILIATION:
1) NO MONTHLY BANK RECONCILIATION DONE.
0 CASH RECEIPTS OR CASH DISBURSEMENT BOOKS.
2) NO PINANCIAL STATEMENT DONE.

3) NO CANCELLED OR STOP PAYMENT ON ‘CHECKS,

GAITTNIN A |
or V Nia £u' CCOUN' as

1) NO RECORD OF ANY SAVING ACCOUNT.

1979 (Con't) Page 3 of 14 Pages

1) NO EXPENSE REPORTS WERE DONE. .
NO SUBMITTED LIST FOR THE FOLLOWING
“e AUTHORIZATION
B) SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION
C) AS PER CHECKBOOK ONLY FOR NATURE OF EXPENSE
D) AS PER CHECKBOOK ONLY FOR SIGNATURE OF INDIVIDUAL

DO
Ne

NOTHING TO COMPARE FOR COMPLIANCE WITH LOCALS POLICY
FOR REIMBURSEMENT,
3) NO VOUCHER TO COMPARE AMOUNT OF ACTUAL CHECK PAID.

4) NO MINUTES FOR AUTHORIZATION OF EXPENSES.

a4 NO MINUTES FOR EXPENSE ADVANCE.
2) NO SUBMISSION OF YOUCHERS WITH SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION.

NO iV DENCE TO SHOW ANY WAGES PAID.

MIATA T QT) OMT A
oe or ae REPO R PING

1) NO MINUTES OR CONSTITUTION FOR APPROVAL.
) UNABLE TO VERIFY THAT IRS FORM 1099 HAS BEEN FILED. WITH IRS.

mT TT) @

- ~ &
TTC) TAY Dp Ta AM MNTWMD DA VAIDIATMO
yaw) a he RD FOR Lost TIMES PA {] why Liat @

1) NO MINUTES TO INDICATE MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT.

lo) ‘ XA WITD rar a }} Ki CN tT
J OAM, oe | if 1 A BO es) a
Z NAT “| ao ff A TAT
B) SEARLE fiw / | 1 30 v 1 6
TOVERMM OM IFWPARMTIC
rOVit Riedy AsePOU CELE GS
7% Tr. ae ym Van’ CUT? mMrrA mM Ss ainen tan! + yar an" 1 an =e z
’ 1 t . C a le HOTAMIAT a ae +
i ) Be, it O \ L {J OLS Eri L LAO KO L INO LADO d RI EEE IIN ti ist De.
oy \ a — - a
) | wD T 1 | i. t hegre) Cor Et ha qc
Ag | \ i Les ae yr sy ak i pa a a 1
“> 1A 7 - > SITS +
LOG | 2 fs poe my (Xie
aj 4 SS Se 7 a Ae
- rr 1 fe aa sa ce A = THY —\-7 ‘
/ By WT YA | ry TT zi AT KT Trt 7 Ss > as f
tg jC : } it : Lira Ly Li \ aed y it O crys
) run ; 4 r
a PED Ping * | {) i +i ‘

Page 4 of 14 Pages

A\TNMENTANOT OT RECORDS.
i on a NA nw pl O Ly PLT ULL LAD eo

: 1) RECORDS. OF LOCAL UNION NOT RETAINED.

1) NO RECORD TO SHOW THAT AUDIT WAS DONE.
2) SAME AS #1 ABOVE.

R wPO RDN OTF FINDINGS .
wets \Y ok NH oe whe he NLS ate a8 NARS 1g

1) NO REPORT OF AUDIT @IVEN- NO RECORD OF AUDIT DONE.
2) SAME AS #1 ABOVE,

Selance brought forweérd per checkbook --------------------~------- $206 fz
Total Income for 1979-----------~----------------------~------------ UNKNO WN

Total expenses from checkbook as compared to cancelled checks----- $5 788. 33

alanes as of 12/31/79 from records available~——~.—._______._........ UNKNOWN
cks paid out with no supporting receipts --------------~------~+- $5788.33
Coseks made out to "CASH":

fité= 7/26/79= Cashed by V. DiGiorgio --—~--<<.+---seenswewen $168.00

#150= 12/11/79- Cashed by V.F.W.#5913--------------~-------~- $35.00
Checks written to Union Officers and/or Members;
Jruce Varrel]------------------------------------+-+--------~------- $8
Vincent DiGiorgio------~----------------~-~~~-~~-~-------~--------- $280.22
Z

Villiam Carrol-------------------------~-------~-----~-~---~~----- $225.00

teal Bouffard--------------~---~-~~+--~~-~~---+-~~------~~---~------ 530.00
arion Dantzler-------—-~-----—-~-~~.~~~.~~~~ ~~~... ~~~ + $53.66

Page 5 of 14 Pages

1980

AUDIT REPORE

1) NO CASH RECEIPTS BOOK.

A) AUGUST DEPOSIT SLIP MISSING.
B) JAN., FEB., MARCH, APRIL, MAY, JUNE, JULY, AND AUGUST BANK
STATEMENTS MISSING .

NO PER CAPITA REPORTS FROM COUNCIL 82 WERE RETAINED BY LOCAL
OFFICERS.

NO CASH RECEIPTS BOOK.
AME AS #3 ABOVE.
NO RECORD OF DEPOSITS IN CHECKBOOK.

CASH DISBURSEMENTS:

1) CHECKS NOT/KEPT WITH BANK STATEMENT,

NO CASH DISBURSEMENT BOOK

CANCELLED CHECKS DO COMPARE WITH CHECKBOOKX.

NO CASH DISBURSEMENT BOOK

PAYER ON CHECK=SAME AS CHECKBOOK.
ENDORSEMENT AGREES WITH THE PAYER.
OIGNATURES ON CHECKS SIGNED BT OFFICERS.

NO VALID LOCAL CONSTITUTION.

NO INVOICES-NO EXPENSE REPORTS.

SAME AS #6 ABOVE.

NO CASH DISBURSEMENT BOOK,

SAME AS #8 ABOVE.

NO BALANCE CARRIED IN CHECKBOOK.

ASCONCILIATION

yi TTON

NO MONTHLY BANK RECONCILIATION DONE.
NO CASH RECEIPTS OR CASH DISBURSEMENT BOOK.
NO RECORD OF PINANCIAL STATEMENT DONE,

NO CANCELLED OR STOP PAYMENT ON CHECKS.

A NAGQTINET
ACCOUNT:

CHT) CYR GAT LIT A COROT TEM
LHGULED OF A AVYVING ACCOUI |

ITVTVRITR SRh wYPRNSERS =
Ww Dah 1
ALM DU Po PGA SIN tb se

, 1) MM

VD TENT
ALE EOIN Ss

REP
SUBMITTED

AUTHORIZAT
SUPPORTING
PER

PER

CHECK! R
Pd Us I

CHECKS

ORTS DONE.
LIST FOR THE
ION |
DOC
00K
ook
MPARE
MENT.

FOR

1980 (Con't)

ONLY FOR SIGNA'

FOLLOWING;

UMEN TATION
NATURE OF EXPENSE

TURE OF INDIVIDUAL.

COMPLIANCE

WITH LOCALS POLI!

2) NOTHING To co
FOR REIMBURSE

3) NO VOUCHER

4) NO MINUTES

BAPENSE

oan Cee |

2) UNABLE TO VERIFY THAT IRS FORM 1099 HAS BEEN FILED
3) ONLY MINUTES OF ONE LOCAL MEMBERSHIP MEETING 10/18

TIM:

Nt Dy
we NA

Lost

Ter MARTAT A T
| PINANGI

yd
WO

EVID

ORD

ENCE

REPORTING

rey

BAREIS)

MINUS

8. tAnTTY AG 4
Wes OAM Ao ff 4
i" & TAR Avy it 4
4 ae | 1 a i
p. is Wine Aw if

COVERNMEN TA

LOCAT: UNTO!
| 1) HO
ry CHA

qj OE Be

AT,

1) \T
EP O R

TPO! ay

| SS be

m
Te TE
a. ok
PPePO? Ai
UL: AH
RECORD

ARs NA Sg
ti
1

CUTTY Vel
LO ITLAS VF

TO COMPARE AMOUNT
FOR AUTHORIZ

ATION OF

OF ACTUAL CHECK PATD.

EXPENSES.

FOR EXPENSE ADVANCE.

F VOUCHERS

TO SHOW ANY WAGES

LOST

TO INDICATS
AROVE
ABOVE.

TIS

THAT

AL CONTRIBUTIONS.
1s

(NAT A

\ Tm TVA TINT T
OF} LOCAL NJaV cE Wy «dk

ABOVE.

WITH

Pp A

MON THLY

FORM

SUPPORTING DOCUME}?

AD.

NO MINUTES OR CONSTITUTION FOR APPROVAL.

TIME PAYMENTS

PINANCIAL R#PORT.

WUT ety
OV Eat

G90 HAS

MUA L

Te ies
Lo Y

ITATION.

MTT

OES

WILED.

FINANCIAL REPORT".

Th
EX

S
80 IN RECORDS.
1980 (Con't)

' Tr Thi RT\cA
= TAT A XT 7y RHYMOAR J ©
TATNTSENANCs OF neOULDO $

‘CORDS OF LOCAL UNION RETAINED

PART.

DANTZL

1) AUDIT DONE ON 8/8/80 BY MARION

#225 FOR $17.10

2) NO RECORD OF RECOMMENDATIONS

REPORT OP

ses Nice he Nass

; TTS ~ (nN ON e
FINDINGS:

NO EVIDENCE OF ANY AUDIT REPORT.

A ABOVE.

CN. fy NAA A ON

OAM AD Ht 4

ee ee

1
2

Balance

Total income for 1980 #rom devosit slinvs
(
\

August deposit slip missing)-------- teenie

Total expenses from checkbook---------~--------~----- ceueiniinictabeieedin $1194
Balanee as- of 72/31/80 as stated in check boo wq<<idmntmcumn a=m—= $1100.79
7OSCKS. PSi0 ct with supporting Pees] pte senna ie -- 53026.
Checks paid out without Supporting receipts-----~--------~------- 38925.
checks made out to CASH;

os ae 5 b
7153-1/7/80 Cashed by Bruce Farrel]-~--+--+..----—---_----_.-_~- 9300,
*184-4/24/80 Cashed by Bruce Farrell-----------~--~------..____ “200,
FaIG= 7/26/00 Caged ‘wy BL Cyl clewig were iterenme matinee eee b6O,
1309-8/4/80 Oashed by Y. O

IRR fo sean ag d bv

; 222-37 3/700 Cashe

checks written to Union Officers and/or Members;
ruce rrell]---------~~--~-—-— ~~~ +--+ + 5 = ee $1920.05
RALPH COO Ken a en Sime ee ee ee eee > 889.2°
arion ntZlere------------~---- - ~~ +--+ + ee 586, 70
aniel. Leni hanq-=—-+ ieee seme ee senna ee eee eee 24.6,.50
Weitere CT rrr rr meme ey ect eres errno 130.67
oward DS Ce a me ne ne ee an ye nO i a oe as eS eee Sn ae eae es ec ee een wee ne 110,00
aloh Andradeg----------------~-- 2 ee 55.00
UY Jinks On-<<-----8--~-- 1 ewe eee eee 45.00

ee a

‘otal 3982.61

BR, TRE

Page 7 of 14 Pages

ASURER OF LOCAL 399

UNKN

breught forward @s per check boo k—<.wseamenmenenumun ----- IKNO'

310816.97
9.49

1981
“AUDIT REPORT

1) AMOUNTS IN CASH RECEIPTS POOK DO

NOVEMBER DEPOSIT SLIP MISSING AND SEPT. BANK
2) PER CAPITA REPORTS FOR AUGUS®,
3) CASH BOOK AGREES WITH RECEIPTS

4) GASH BOOK WAS CORRECTED BY PREVIOUS OFFICER
INCORRECT ADDITION.
5) DEPOSIT NOT RECORDED IN CHECKBOOK.

CASH DIDBURSEMENTS:
1) CHECKS NOT WITH BANK STATEMENTS,
2) CHECKS COMPARE TO CHECKBOOK
3) PAYEE ON CHECK SAME AS CHECKBOOK AND LEDGER
4) ENDORSEMENT AGREES WITH THE PAYER,
RES ON CHECKS ARE SIGNED BY OFFICERS
NO VALID LOCAL CONSTITUTION.
6 REPORTS AND/OR RECEIPTS ARE
7) SAMS AS #6 ABOVE,
8) EXPENSES ARE CLASSIFIED IN GENERAL TERMS.
9) ADDITION OF FIGURES HAS BEEN CORRECTED BY P
10) BALANCE HOT CARRIED IN CHECKBOOK.

) SOME EXPENSE

— chad hh. ckohat

BANK RECONCILIATION:
1) NO MONTHLY BALANCING OF BANK STATEMENT.

2) NO FINANCIAL STATEMENT DONE.

3) A CHECK FOR 33,900.00 WAS DRAWN ON THE LOCA

A UnisOs 2 pl
ON pean Ren AS PER BANK STATEMENT, THE CHEC

CNT Ae GS THT RT) A a f R MITMNO TAN WAT MT %X TX MT. DA ATIF
JIAO Pa IS AS JR Ey Wie ING ty aN TR LY ab Ba SB SEIN eve
AAT TNC / AC TM
SAVING ACCOUNT:
ary DPAADTD Mm Arr oy VING CAATING
hy it, OC cid Qi ALLY Y VIN (y i CCOUN i's
r) Ti ptihS he Td TAREE TART Cet 2 |
ES PL Ui a Be Bey ee sév.1 SES SD ie
<isnchiiecoaesecedapsaebheciiinsesaasnipasiems seaapeds toca cease
ct \MT ry SVT Cues MANDY ake @ \ QM sa | oe FT a mma
1 ) SOME toy KE ORS UTS mL ee OUPPOR Itt WJ Len Le Toe
aT) : a N= rf 5 ™TMNTIC TO n \3T
iV Poa Vue TO AU LH R 1 NS ke LAS
2 OAM ATTHODADMTNIA FVCY ONT TPA TTA OT re RRA Dp mMa
LJ PY assaf Pi LIT JOU USN tr PTON LHC SIP BTS |

\
C) SAME AS "BY" APOVE

QA MIT KS mwoy A YW
P ot BAS y) Pie LAP V Le

Page 8 of 14 Pages

COMPARD WITH DEPOSIT SLIPS.

STATEMENT MISSING.

NOVEMBER AND DECEMBER MISSING.

AND LEDGER BOOK.

BOOK,

IN RECORDS.

REVIOUS OFFICERS.

LS ACCOUNT ON t2f2e7 87 «
K FOR $3,900.00 WAS

TBURSED EXPENS

2 \
=]

\ N

—
a ed

O74

1981

(Con't)

Page of 14 Pages

WC
WTS:

con't)
NOTHING TO COMPART F
OF UNION.OFFICERS.

RECORDS ON

R COMPLIANCE EXCEPT PAST PRACTICE

FILE, AMOUNT OF CHECK COMPARSS WITH RECEIPT.
52

MINUTES FOR MEETINGS OF 1/31=- 3/10- 4/14- 5/14- AND ere ARE
ON FILE, REMAINDER FOR THE YEAR ARE MISSING. MINUTES OF 6/9/81
INCLUDE THE ACCEPTED TREASURER'S REPORT. THE MINUTES ONLY
AUTHORIZE A SUM OF $60.00 TO BE SPENT FOR A CONTRIBUTION.

ADVANC

TANT Ti AT
WKRPE N
I

1) NO

MINUTES FOR EXPENSE ADVANCE
2) SOME SUBMISSION OF RECEIPTS WITH SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

(LINE «
CATS SD
NO EVIDENCE TO SHOW ANY WAGERS PAID.
ALLOWANCES:
1) NO MINUTES OR CONSTITUTION FOR APPROVAL.
2) UNABLE TO VERIFY THAT IRS FORM 1099 HAS BEEN FILED WITH IRS.
LOST TIM®:
NO CORD OF LOST TIME PAYMENTS,
PINANCIAL REPORTING: .
1) NO RECORD TO INDICATE MONTHLY FINANCIAL REPORT.
2) SAME AS #1. ABOVE.
3) SAME AS #1 ABOVE.
SOVERUMEN TAT, REPORTING:
1.) NO REPORT OF RECORD TO SHOW THAT IRS FORM 990 HAS BERN FILED.
2) NO RECORD OF POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS.
LOCAL UNION REPORTING:
EL
1) NO REPORT OR RECORD OF "LOCAL UNION ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT".
2?) SAMB AS #1 ABOVE,

Page 10 of

REC FILE OF LOCAL. UNION WERE TURNED OVER

TTM GY

BY MARV]
CORD ON FILE
RE it) COME

SHER ON 11/2/81,

ENDAT

EPORT OF

REE

RECOR]I

NO RECORI
brought forward as per checkbook---------~--~----------~----

income for 1981,

a from deposit slips
vember's Deposit

Slip Missing)

enses from checkbook
of 12/31/81 from ledge
aid out with supporting
without

NO cancelled

receipts-------------------------- :
id o1 Supportins receipts-----~-------~---------
checks in files

PUA CVT
MASH" s

shed

a
Cashed

Bruce larrell
by R. Bentley

(Ne } 3
La S at e q

Casned

rank!

Sc A gi aS Sn iis: ii i i tm en vias )
iv

P< S
ELECTION
NO
$17354.25
9546, 03
& 2049.31
6 7072.95
§ 8183.89
3 89.19
5 600.00
5 20,00
D 50.00
ib 20.00
co eee

1981 (CGon't | Page 11 of 14 Pages

oF die

Checks written to Union Officers and/or Members;

Bruce Yarrel]--------- ---------- ~----~-------- ~~ --- - - - - - - - - - - --- 5056, 92
Vineent. DIGIORCIO-~-----~- + - — nn ere Sneeemneeosene % 894,99
william Dy UN OS --- $e rr ee reer S 252,50
Joseoh Ventrice--------- 3 3 rer rrr 5 290.25
Raymond Tettier----------------------- - -- - - » 175.00:

Frand Colich---------------------------- - —-- - = 5 5 ee 3

Oo Go wm
©
ie

Guy MNinkson-------------------- -- - ee rer -3 50.00

Marion Dantzler------------------------------------------=-------- --}3 30,00
Total 65629, 66

Checks written for audit of Local'S Books, Information taken from

Checkbook (NO DATE IN CHECKBOOK)

“375—{ Paid to Bruce Farrell----~---------------------- $55.46

#376= Paid to Marion Dantzler------------------------ $50.00

(277— Paid to Bruce Parrell-------------------------- 350.00

DURING THE YEAR OF 1981, LOCAL 399 BORROWED $1500.00 FROM GREEN HAVEN

LOCAL 152. THIS MONEY WAS DEPOSITED IN THE LOCAL 399 ACCOUNT IN JAN. 1982.

VA SH
CAS

1982 Page 12.of 14 Pages

AUDIT REPORT

[ ADT pmMma
Bee) HIP ED =

4) AMOUNTS IN CASH RECEIPTS BOOK DO COMPARE WITH D=POSIT SLIPS.

ALL DEPOSIT SLIPS AND BANK STATEMENTS ARE ON FILE FOR 1982,
) PER CAPITA REPORTS FROM COUNCIL 82 ARE ON FILE FOR 1982.

CASH BOOK AGREES WITH RECEIPTS.
OASH BOOK FOR THE FIRST BIGHT MONTHS OF YEAR HAS BEE
REMAINDER OF YEAR CORRE

5) DEPOSIT NOT RECORDED IN CHECKBOOK.

Ao CONCILIATION:

iy
ts
>
_
ea
ap
(x
ss
Oo
ho
~
J
by
j

CHECKS ARE WITH BANK STATEMENTS.

PAYEE ON CHECK SAME A
ENDORSEMENT AGREES WITH THE PAYER.

SIGNATURES ON CHECKS ARE SIGNED BY OFFICERS-
NO YALID LOCAL CONSTITUTION,

OC}
S CHECKBOOK AND LEDGER BOOK.
T
A

SOM EXPENSE REPORTS AND/OR RECEIPTS ARE IN RECORDS.
SAME AS #6 ARO\

SXPENSES ARE CLASSIFIED IN GENERAL TERMS.
ADDITION CORRECTION IN FIRST EIGHT

OF YEAR ALL IS IN ORDER.

BALANCE NWOT CARRIED IN CHECKEOOK.

‘e

£ P AT IN
, i
¥ ok. ‘

TN (\KRTINTT ae ‘ AT A AT - | AT YY ry tT. TVA RT a Ct ya IVTARA TY Cs
PAD Ga HL Y BALAN COIN roOMAY PAK OLA pieM ENTS .

HQ PINATCIAL SPATEMENT DONE FOR FIRST SIGHT MONTHS OF

2EANINDER OF VRAR DONE TN CPNPRAT 1 aa gules
wiv Dini OF POA DONK LN Gals LAA Lis SOG yy Re
PTPITAD STATA PATIM I TMe AT hy NTT 27 (\ tT OM ryd “th M (X
ilag es ep es a © ee ian Gl Ts JA! it JAI v VW i! beoO5S ° O2——- [7] TAR a)
a aes
AND $100.00.
a Wy CNTT Ne
ASI FNS °
2eCONN OF ANY GAWTNOA A ACO IN|
ny RS Laz WE 2 i an) Ge Ce Sr oY Os a
2 ad Yr eT et Ys
te Sk be de
(yt. YF DIG AMS GEN TyIA COTTE Tye > WADTDma
Diy AE ao Ga: TWAS. 2 SUP POs CLG Lio FLD ig

‘Vary Dnt Trees TA ATTIC TOA
0 Uhl FOR Lu HOUT aT LOR

a) @Oie SUPPORTT?!

/ CTI DA PANS DPAmTpP me
a re Uh a We Be eS atl 2 i ta D Cul BA PLO a blr we hem eee I )

CORRECTED_

CHECKS FOR THE FIRST EIGHT MONTHS OF YRAR NOT WITH BANK STATEMENTS

216200

PN ON TA Tye TATA TWA

PULL Vy SSC, LINAS ID Con t) ~

” CAWI AG 17 ARNT
C) he amid bal bs re) MBN A BOY y te

" OAnity ac Tr f PNT TA
)}) SAME AS "BY ABOVE.

NOTHING TO COMPARE FOR COMPLIANCE EXCEPT PAST PRACTICE

NA TIME TOY at ATDA
Oni UiN ION OF i Lud pQke) e

OF THE RECORDS ON FILE, AMOUNT OF CHECKS COMPARE WITH RECEIPT
R
ob

MINUTES OF MERTING HELD 11/9/82 ONLY ONE
AEPORT ACCEPTED BY PROPER PROCEDURE

NQ MINUTES FOR BXPENSS ADVANCES,

SOME SUBMISSION OF RECEIPTS WITH SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION.

HO 2VIDENCS TO SHOW ANY WAGES PAID.

.T or PA? LT (YS 2
ALLO % a el a

TOST TT

KA. 1 ese Rt

TO MINUTES OR CON
' UOT
an

HO MINUTES NSTITUTION FOR APPROVAL.
m R

QNABLE TO VERIFY TYAT IRS FORM 1099 HAS BEEN FILED WITH IRS.

ess)

7)
+e

DIRINND 7 Th ae ate a Go| MT RrH 9 WRAITAPT al
ua HCORD O # Jylio L TIM i) PA LIMLIOAN Bie e

INANCIAL REPORTING:
4)
/

MO RECORD TO INDICATE MONTHLY FINANCIAL. REPORT FOR FIRST BIG

4 RTIMTIO \ tT RPT TS D WRT i i ae GA NT Nw!
SONTHS OF L cae REMAINDER Is IN Ge AL

MAD AMD
Lr GN oD

LED WTiolt ©
it

FIRST EIGUT MONTHS NOT DONE- REMAINDER OF YEAR DONE.
TO MINUTES FOR AUTHORIZATION.

CTAET OM ACT im) ri Be Tay ?! TTNCe

CAYITMAD TID
\ -C) Vi ay Ae ihe SR

‘ge =| Lh kos pe i ie

ty) TO REDARPM YR PRANRDA mM enn mram toa FOP? FAS BRN WITT,
1) HO REPORT OR RECORD 70 SHOW PHAT IRS FORM 990 HAS BEEN MILED.
» \ ~ > 1) ) Tm 1A MIN AT T ATIMTATA
oo ) Hee tte kal POLE J AT, Ke ERI Cm Fy 5 eS

TATA T MTePAITT Ds prep mratrn

ti att i LON LEPOR bats

renee eres ennNSERESTESSSUEEoneoasanstemnetioeat
4 \ fy REPORT OR RAMA AW CrOMAT. TIeTAT KR ATRTTTA TATRA AT AT rap) OM
/ sf Sree & Oit i A ER GN ES YOR D 8) = NS yh LAGE AWE UA L Og [N ANC Tah at 7 oe rR py e

MATHTENANCE OF RECORDS:

HE GOT. hd %

RECORDS ON FILE OF LOCAL UNION ARE WHAT WERE TURNED OVER AT

ITEOMNTON MTME
T TION \

snd Be Se Sh SY

1) AUDIT OF LOCAL BOOKS BY V. DiGIORGIO AND W. BYRNES-9/10/82
CHECK? 535 FOR $100.00 AS PER CHECKBOOK.
AUDIT OF LOCAL BOOKS BY MARVIN FLASHER 10/26/82-CHECK#571
FOR 3167.70 AS PER LEDGER. .

\ nN “~ fie Si 5 T CTART Ty *t"
2) NO RECORD OF RECOMMENDATIONS.

DODM \T]) MTN Waa
Rh OPORT OF “INDINGS :

READ AT MEETING IN NOVEMBER BY W. BYRNES-TREASURER.

4%
/
2) tH DrAHoey NY itp

DAS =D A kd 2 ee i EB ager

flénee brought forward as per led gehen — rein mrereeest

Lo té 00k, ledger and cancelled checks----~---—:
lense as of 12/14/62, from gsemeral Let ger ——aem enema
snecks paid out with supporting recelipts-------- saliastasientententententententestetentententententen
necks Pld Out without supporting rece pte —-——-<n-<semessimemnena -

Checks made out to "CASH"; #445-1/12/82-cashed by V.F.W. 5913-----3
yhecks written to Union Officers and/or Members;
raymond MacDermott-----+-- ~~-----—-- ------ me
aaymond Tettier----------- -----~------- ---------- sslentesteaietanientenientenieetetectenteetentener
Joseph Yentrice-------------~--~~~~~-- —----------- - -~ ------
2ruce Farrell=-----.——. mm nr —-~—--------- —-
Marion Dantzler-j---<-- er nn ee
ruv linkson-j--------------~ —-—----—--------- --------- -~--------------
fixe Rooney----- —-------- ~~ + ~-------~---- ------------------
ill °yrnes-----------~--~~+-~-~--~~--- me -
VERWCOI GE DT GL i meer cere terpenes are ea aera nee ee een
ERCTRRER Lil Tye i etme recess acai neem ats gnynemnvnerenr arn mcr ani aS nena Ren
J LOPWL LT pet arr aie cerca neerierimiinien m2 - --------- ---
Tota
Checks #70, 479, 480-missing,no date and blank entry in checkbook.
71500,00 loan repayed to Green Haven Local 152,

from depo dt Slips-------------~----~-~--~---~-:

ho—-O-

0S >
100 0 £1 OV =U

matics ebony

t
4

CDi x

Ki }
Re,
SB

}

»D

CS Cw €

WNOOWO
e
aC

J
20
J

~
— 4
e
Va
XQ
=
—

°
C

O
O

)

2 La
‘ay

e OO
Q
ev
{
e V7

*
|
~ |
\
H
i
: |

FACTS YOU SHOULD KNOW

Sergeant's Local

Did not elect delegates to the Convention.

Two officers are scabs - Tessier & Block
Two officers are T.U.F.C.O - Meehan & Fitzpatrick
T.U.%.Cs0
Directors: Fitzpatrick a Sgt.
Casey a Sgt.
Farrell a Sgt.

Many T.U.F.C.O supporters are sergeants and involved. Tessier,
Block, Meehan and B. Smith.

Goal to Replace Council 82

Morrissey - President of Auburn - is now being sued for failure to
represent female employees - $500,000 suit

Negotiated a contract for management at Catskill - against
Council 66 employees. Letters of protest filed by Council
66 members to AFSCME and Council 82.

Requested the Department of Correctional Services send
him to a management school that was conducted by CSEA.

Made job request to Commissioner Coughlin

Make job request to Commissioner Coleman

Lost Correction Policy election in 1981
Casey - Non productive member for years

Left 1979 negotiations 2 days before a settlement was
reached

Went to Vermont to hide out at the beginning of the strike

Fitzpatrick ~ Signed a statement on Sgt F. Sulka - Sulka was disciplined
by the Department of Correctional Services

Negotiated a contract for management in Catskill against
Council 66 employees, this action was protested by members
of Council 66 to AFSCME and Council 82

Make a job request to Meyer Frucher

—A——
“ ~
.

Fitzpatrick Con't' Went to Las Vages during strike

As a Council 82 staff representative he gave up a
C.O's peace officer status for 2 years

EnCon settlement labor/management setting gave up the
right of employees to live in home area, now the agency
can make an ENCON officer live in a specified area.

Gave away seniority for campus security - only officers
on the day shift can bid on day shift jobs.

Lost election bid for Council 82 Vice President at the
1981 convention.

Slattery - Sent letters to Commissioner Coughlin wanting a Sgts. |
appointment. |

Sent letters to Commissioner Coughlin requesting the
Department to re-examine their position on hiring female
correction officers - does not want them in the prisons

Testified at Ossining hearings on

(1) Against seniority

(2) Freeze on transfers

(3) Wanted nationwide T.V. inside facility to meet
inmates - was in agreement with riotous inmates

G.ML - 30

° ° es, -

ws | | STATE OF NEW YORK - DEPARESIENT OF CORRECTIONAL SERV ICES inten fy mn!

GREAT MEADOW COR KECTION TAL EF FACILITY
INTE SR DEPARTME: VTAL COMMU! WICATIO: v. i

DATE_duly 27, 1981
TO: .Deps Supt. W: Winch —
FROM: C.0. D. wtlescatand os

sass SUBJECT: Incident in Chart Office on 7-23-81. co oe.

Iwes assigned to the Chart office om 7-23-81, + ae eqproxinately | le: 15 3 p.m.
a trensportetion Sgt. entered the Office end requested to use the phone. Some
one commented to the Sgt. that things were not going too well. He wes pelea

to the Committment papers being left at Fishidill. He indicated not very well end | pS
rade the inference of using vulgarity. Someone spoke up and steted,h" Becareful,.-

| there is a Lady present. The Draft Sgt. stated,” If she is working for the’
Devertment of Corrections, she' 's no Ladys end besides 2: hate ‘female cczreetions

Officers.-

. - Officer Behr stated, " I beg to differ with you, end who asked for your -
opinion?” —

To my knowledge, nothing more was geuked by either _) There wes & host of |

uniform and civilien employees present along with: e Federal a gone who wes”
sealiee ioe on Great Meadow recone : elke -

em +s "lle 7
~~. Ps As dat a ar

SING SING LOCAL'1413°
“ ‘P.O.BOX 54100 “ | ~ ane

OSSINING, NEW YORK 10562 2 Sack &
/ fey FS Honyg CC STD MICHAEL STOKES? +’

ROBERT B. SLATTERY |
PRESENT VICE PRESENT a ee
THEODORE EDLOW caer ee To a “JAMES HAYWOOD)
SECRETARY TREASURER + , ; RECORDING SECRETARY
eee |
2 ~ve ~ Megs at fm ee oe E
— September 2, 1980
Thomas Coughlin lilt oo: at, “a, ae # hy =

Commissioner, D.C.S..

Sirs | . si
I realize that you may be tired of seeing ial

stationery, but, when I think of Albany, I think "who can =

‘trust for a straight enswerf", and I keep ‘coming up with you.
Ky problem is thise I was evalueted for Sergeant by

+, Robert Jackson here at Ossining. This fact was uncovered
curing ny eppeal process. I had not, to that moment, EVER been
under his supervision, or neer his working area, in my entire

careers t+ staggers me to think that he would do an evaluation

of such opm under those SLC MESTARO OS, and moreso, that

he was even assigned the task in the ‘first’ minis, In a personal

confrontation, he said, "Yeak, I've spoken with other supervisors,

end, if I could doiit over, you would rate higher." He added that,
if I ever mentioned that conversation, he would deny it took place.

I @o not kmow which Lieutenant took part in my evaluation. I'm
elmost afreid to kmor.e Pending your reply, I wilil-withhold-sa=—..-

compleint to en "outside" agency.

Hoping to hear from you soon, I remainy,e.

Respectfully,

ROBERT B. SLATTERY AV
PRESIDENT LOCAL 1413 dl

at #
x SEE A, ENCLOSED SING SING OFFICERS

25-01 45th ST.

fic- nv sa 53A5

OTfe United Gederation Lf Corzection Officers, One.

) y gL | P.O. BOX 72.
BOARD OF DIRECTORS QI , a ores
DENNIS J. FITZPATRICK “42839 |

JAMES P. MORRISEY : (518) 782-3535
KEVIN W. CASEY
BRUCE J. FARRELL

MARION L. DANTZLER

; {
x sf |
—e t

Dear Member

We the Directors of T.U.F.C.0. are looking forward to the
upcoming Council 82 Convention in September.

. - As we have expressed in the past, the Department of Correctional
Services, and the present Council 82 leadership, must be replaced.
This Union is in collusion with management, examples of which appear
-daily, military leave, time abuse and promotional exams. Why hasn't
the State implemented the loss of dues checkoff?

We believe changes can come about if we all band together, with

a coalition of borther dedicated to the cause, that correction officers .-

should have their own union, separate and apart from others.

We request your support for the following T.U.F.C.0. candidates:

Dennis Fitzpatrick
Kevin Casey
Bruce Farrell
Jim Morrissey
Marion Danzler
‘Thomas Meehan
’ Jim Shannon

Bernie Smith
Ron Wert

Don Hall

Phil Dobie

Jim Brooks

Sal Florio
Leander McCall

Fraternally,

Dane LE cP
Loma fC Zpatrick

Chairman of The Board

The United Gederation of Correction Officers, Ine.

) P.O. BOX 72.
BOARD OF DIRECTORS Xo HUDSON FALLS, NEW YORK
DENNIS J. FITZPATRICK RY | 12838
JAMES P. MORRISEY iz. | (518) 782.2835

KEVIN W. CASEY
BRUCE J. FARRELL i
MARION L. DANTZLER

Dear Member

We the Directors of T.U.F.C.0. are looking forward to the
upcoming Council 82 Convention in September.

As we have expressed in the past, the Department of Correctional
Services, and the present Council 82 leadership, must be replaced.
This Union is in collusion with management, examples of which appear
daily, military leave, time abuse and promotional exams. Why hasn't
the State implemented the loss of dues checkoff?

We believe changes can come about if we all band together, with
a coalition of borther dedicated to the cause, that correction officers -

should have their own union, separate and apart from others.

We request your support for the following T.U.F.C.O. candidates:

Dennis Fitzpatrick Bernie Smith
Kevin Casey Ron Wert
Bruce Farrell Don Hall
Jim Morrissey Phil Dobie
Marion Danzler Jim Brooks
‘Thomas Meehan Sal Florio
: Jim Shannon Leander McCall
Fraternally,
, Z —
Dennis d¢ patrick

Chairman of The Board

LOCAL PRESIDENTS INFORMATIONAL MEETING

D. Bischert

—— rane

Cc. Abraham
Long Island C.F.

D. Bischert

F. Benedetto

LOCAL PROBLEMS
LOCAL. 1240
Elmira

Lecal 152
Green Haven

APRIL 23, 1984

" }
A LAAALLA

copy of Executive Board activities--and hand as-

7
btA I

to Executive Board-members—and, presidents,
responsibility to each local present alse

, AFSCME manuel, on what it does for members.

Explanation of how local Unions should

structure activity on TUFCO and who to
contact by area of state to report to

Council to Frank Benedetto.

Council 82’s responsibility to local
presidents and local presidents to the
local members. If there is anyone present
advocating TUFCO get out of Council 82.

Requested regional presidents meeting as
per handout breakdown.

If there is a meeting a person should be
there from Council. If a meeting is scheduled
to notify Council 82.

Explanation as to his area of responsibility
as special staff. Double agents must go.
Entering period of open access where locals
are open to be addressed by unions.

Daily business will be conducted as usual
Council 82 will still be responsive to the
needs of its members. Look to local leaders
to keep Council 82 informed on TUFCO
activity. To report grievances and problems
within Council 82.

What we need is a small test for each local
as to services and problems.

No L/M problems. No TUFCO activity.

George Schneider - more notice as to this
process of problems address to J. Burke as
per Review article. What are we going to
do exactly when a strong statement is made.
Be more specific.

*keep open communications to Council.
*No response as per cancellation of
meeting or appointments.

*Some TUFCO literature being passed but
members don’t know why.

Ws
J. Burke

Local 2458
Re McCarthy
Building Gds.

Local 1040

J. Mann
Attica

Local 1792
J. Emmett
SUNY

Local 1872
Lynn Day
Forest Rangers

Local 1873
Larry Johnson
Conservation

Local 2655
C. Cambareri
Mid-Hudson Psy

Local 2965
V. Sparace
C.N.Y-P.C

Local 738

J. Halvorsen
Hudson

Fe. Benedetto

Local 300
Lyon Mt.

LOCAL PRESIDENTS INFORMATIONAL MEETING
APRIL 23, 1984

stated he must give priority to certain
areas be it Albany or work cites. If
staff representatives are not responsive
to inform him and they will be dealt with.

No problems. Atmosphere getting better.
Some will sign cards to break buns.

Problems being dealt with OK. Staff
representative at facility very responsive
to local. TUFCO very small problem.

Good response from Council 82.

No problems. No report of TUFCO
activity.

Members have just rejoined because of
good response.

No problems. No TUFCO activity.
Asshole back on street

Problem of title change

Problem of title change. No TUFCO
activity

TUFCO past president tried to get
them in. Lack of communication
from Council 82 but getting
better.

asked what are needs. Contact Joe
Puma. Past practice was problem
now Council 82 is responding.

Carl Rounds - No problems but is
glad Council 82 Executive Board
has changed. See Council 82
address New recruits. No TUFCO
problems.

LOCAL PRESIDENTS INFORMATIONAL MEETING
APRIL 23, 1984

Local 1272
T. Rounds Grievance about Masterjoseph
Clinton female correction officer who

is screwing who contractually.
Wants to see I.P. on this
problem because agency backs

off but Clinton is not in support
of TUFCO as per mail gram

Local 1653

C. Abraham TUFCO in back yard. Only friends of

Long Island TUFCO are signing cards. Some of
these are coming back due to Larry
Germano. Keep facility opened.

Local 1413

W. Jakes Communication problem. Information

Ossining not being distributed. No feed back
on contract, if seniority is lost the
members would walk. Having problems.

Local 1041

Eastern

Karl Simons TUFCO some curiosity about TUFCO
Some people trying to use TUFCO to
make out for personal benefits.
Looking to Council 82 for the outcome
on Time class, Military leave, etc.
Some disappointment with QWL.

Local 1871

Sgt.

Herb Jones First six months of new Board TUFCO
really worked on Council 82. Turned
this around by active assistance.

Lotal 923

Albion

D. Seefeldt No major problems. some involvement
due to ignorance. Staff representative
excellent response.

Local 1406

Collins

R. Lomanto Needs more information as to open

period. Rules to take and show
superintendent as to open period.
GIVEN COPY BY WOODBOURNE

Local 2556
Groveland
uM. Clark

Local 1447
Auburn
Ed Brewster

Local 866
Adirondack
P. Dobie

Local 1285
Gabriels
C. Hugaboom

Local 1279
Great Meadow
T. Badman

Local 2398
Arthurkill
N. Grinnage

Local 2967
Otisville
D. DiGerlando

LOCAL PRESIDENTS INFORMATIONAL MEETING

APRIL 23, 1984

No TUFCO at all. 7 old members
question on new recruits. Some
questions by new employees as to
benefits pay increases. Staff
representative good response.
New Board coming on soon.

Along with Dave DeChick and Mr. Holmes
alot of turmoil due to boss. Council 82
handled their meeting well. TUFCO very
strong. Possibly under control. Would
like to see more regional activity.

The law firm is the problem as far as
Council 82. TUFCO some movement to get
Council 82 off ass to wakeup.

New board here. Needs to get information

on how union things get done. Some TUFCO

move since the end of March. TUFCO is due
to curiosity. Council 82 is the main stay
as far as members need.

Along with Dennis Fletcher and Nick Catalfamo.
Staff representative good. Stewards on all
shifts. TUFCO very big because of internal
union. End is still Council 82. TUFCO
because of health spa, fraternal order.

This not a part of local business.

TUFCO there on three occasions. Did not
good response. Feeling that TUFCO is only
dealing where people are in need.

Some small groups of problems. Council 82
there at any request.

LOCAL PRESIDENTS INFORMATIONAL MEETING
APRIL 23, 1984

Local 1264

Coxsackie

J. Kraft Few problems on TUFCO, very hazardous to
TUFCO - Pro Council 82

Local 1798

OGS .

G. Floyd no TUFCO Pro Council 82 always and forever.
Some communication Problems only on occasion.

Local 1876

Camps

R. Fitch Members undecided. Problem on grievance
length of response,

Local 2825

Bayview .

B. Moses TUFCO very quiet

Local 1996

Edgecombe, Lincoln,
Fulton, Parkside

We. Hill TUFCO in Lincoln. Not in Edgecombe or
Fulton

Local 1255

Fishkill

R. Brown No problem with Council 82. TUFCO

intimidating new officers. TUFCO is
now on defense,

Local 1548

Watertown

M. Booth Along with Frank Guerin and Lance Mason.
Beginning to look like Auburn due to the
transfers. Management some problem. .
Council 82 has begun to gain the confidence
of members,

Local 1790

Safety Officers

R. Lesniak Not present

Local 781

Ogdensburgh

M. Estes Same as Watertown. Good response from staff
and Clinton. ‘No TUFCO there at all.

Local 1151

Woodbourne

P. Healy TUFCO trying hard with little success. Even

young officers are rejecting. Problems are
from Department not due to union, Grievance

procedure at agency level. All in Support
of Council 82. .

0 Eo

anita Chien tnt s +40 ws sini

{

TO: The Membership DATE: April 9, 1984

FROM: R.T.s Lomanto, President Local 14-06 |

SUBJECT: challenges To Council 82 Representation. |

On Tuesday April 3, 198+, this Local attended a meeting chaired by the
President of Council 82, Mr. Richard Bischert.. Mr. Bischert addressed
this Regional Policy Meeting consisting of representatives of the Attica,
Albion, Alden,Groveland and Collins facilities regarding the impending
challenge by an organization calling themselves THE UNITED FEDERATION OF
CORRECTION OFFICERS, TUFCO for short. Also in attendance at this

meeting was Bob Maloney, Field Rep from Council 82 for this area. Mr.
Bischert pointed out that he is aware of TUFCO and TUFCO'S tactics to

jump the gun by misrepresenting themselves to anyone who will listen to
their propaganda. There is nothing wrong with a challenge for the sole
bargaining rights currently enjoyed by Council 2s The problem lies in
the fact that there is a certain time for this challenge, May 1, 1964+ to
be specific, and TUFCO has jumped the gun here as well as at other facil-
Lties. TUFCO has passed out literature maligning Council 82 here at this
facility. Mr. James, the Superintendent has issued a memorandum directed
at the individual responsible for these acts to stop this unlawful be-
havior immediately. Council 82 is fully prepared to file formal charges
against any member who is found guilty of violating pmper challenge proce=
aures. Mr. Bischert and Mr. Maloney reauest our assistance in reporting
any Pro-TUFCO activity at our facility prior to the beginning of the

May 1, 1984 challenge period. These reports are to be specific, who

did or said what, when and to who.

Any member of this Local who witnesses any Pro-TUFCO activity is directed to

contact your Steward or any Executive Board Member as soon as possible.
Remember, no literature is to be passed-out, peitions signed, notices

posted prior to Mey 1, 1984, Your cooperation will insure that apropriate

action is taken.

What. is TUFCO, who is behind it, what does it stand for, what does it
takeya sucessful challenze are questions that must be ansvered. Do not
miss the next Union Meeting, Tuesday April 24, 1984 at 4pm on the second
floor of Bldg. #12. A separate meeting will be held for the afternoon
shift at 12:00 am, April 25,1984 at the same location. Refreshments to

follow both meetings.

Fraternally Yours,

CPT. SFr

R.T. Lomanto, Pres. Local 1406

CC: Council 82-Jack Burke,

3ischert
Jim Mann, Exec. V
Joe Puma, Chairman Correction Policy

Bob Maloney, Field Rep.

Executive Director

¥ NOY
oa

—
s ~~,

ae ie er, . rm A Am
“) ~_ wn an « pa a P aa is - ome
rir €C ev k ore ; ” -
{ 7 ww!
BUSINESS OFFICE °
Local treasurer training.
IRS law.
Form filing.
Proper expenditure/accounting.
Field auditors, Councils, Locals - suspicion of misappro-

priations.

The International Union also maintains bonds for all locals.
AFSCME Local 826 in Binghamton, New York, received over $11,000
based on an Internationally filed bonding claim against

former officers.
Computer system - Council 82.
Computer expert sent ins
Council can purchase new computers at about 60% retail cost.
International Union - necessary software programs - free.
In the case of Council 82 - $75,000. (Lies » Seve e

Training of office. Braff mite . Pees

COMMUNITY SERVICES

The AFSCME/Council 82 booth at the State Fair.

EDUCATION

Training is received at the local union level.

Full time Education Coordinator (Shirley Reeder) assigned to

New York and Council 82.

Pare

EDUCATION (cont'd.):

- Additional trainers and resources are available from Washington,
D.C.

- Steward Training, Officer rratning. Write a Newsletter, Lobbying,
Safety and Health, Union History, Grievance Handling.

- During 1983, Council 82 conducted a series of education classes
Statewide for both corrections and law enforcement - Every
local within Council 82 - except Auburn.

- Maintains a film library - Educational Union films.

- Available for local union meetings.

- Pubtishes a monthly Steward's Magazine.

- Council 82 regularly sends its staff to the George Meany Labor

Studies Center - arbitration preparation and video-

techniques.

- Open to Council 82 staff members.

FIELD SERVICES

_ In New York, thirteen (13) International staff >_five AFSCME

‘councils + payroll cost of about $1/2 million. |
— f ory

JUDICIAL PANEL

- The Judicial Panel disputes resolution procedure.
- Preventing the various courts from intervening in Union affairs.
= Eight rank and file AFSCME members are selected to sit on
the Judicial Panel.
- Judicial Panel rules on elections, procedure is fair and demo-

cratic:

JUDICIAL PANEL (cont'd.):

- The AFSCME constitution is the only major constitution containing
a bill of rights for union members.
= The rights of the individual are protected against abuse of

power by union officials.

LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS

- Two full time lobbyists on staff to assist Council 82 in Albany.
- Five temporary staff are now assigned to New York:
= Major legislative advances — correction officers in specific.

- Reform of Tier 3. pension. .

- Presently, the staff is acting to keep Brentwood ppéi.

- International Union annually - one or two lobbying days for
Council 82.

- With the assistance of International staff, Council 82 has
become one of the most respected lobbying forces on
Capitol Hill. .

- Twenty lobbyists work in Washington, D.C. - Congressional
jastalation programs favorably affect our members around .-
the country and in Council 82.

- Passing LEAA - general revenue sharing funds directly used by
correctional services.

= Maintains voting records on all New York congressmen.

- Computerized ability to tell Council 82 or its members how
an individual congressman voted.

- The Public Employee Conference is the major lobbying effort

ef public service unions.

~—

POLITICAL ACTION

- Political Action field workshops throughout.
- Phone banking, preparation of leaflets and palm cards, how to

write a letter to your representative, and how to lobby.

PUBLIC AFFAIRS:

- International Union's use of a television studio.
= Councils to produce tapes dealing with specific problems,

tailored specifically to your members.

- Such as the closing of Brentwood on Long Island, and to present

the Union's views instantaneously to the public.

PUBLIC POLICY

- Public Policy Department recently produced county by county

analysis.

- Every federal source‘of revenue which the state's (corrections)

local government may receive, describing the cuts which

have taken place since 1980.

- Public Policy Department - access to economic forecasting data

which is essential during negotiations.

~ Forecast what state revenues will be over the next three years.

RESEARCH DEPARTMENT

- The correction officer stress study was conducted through the

Research Department by Francis Cheeks.

RESEARCH DEPARTMENT (cont'd.):

Two professional staff whose sole and exclusive function is
the analysis of pension and health care programs.

Analyze pension proposals or health care proposals submitted
across the table by the employer.

Computer system update _ improve its wage and benefit infor-
mation.

Information to Council 82 and your members on wages received

by correction officers or other classifications around the

country.

Computer is also capable of providing contractual language,
(i.e., sick leave, vacation, holidays) from other contracts
around the country.

Assist Council 82 with onsite contract negotiations.

Oren's Safety and Health booklet.

Services provided by the International Union, a provision of
budget analysis. .

Outside consultant may run anywhere from $3000 ‘to $20,000.

Budget experts ability to analyze the state's budget, Depart-
ment of Correction's budget - determine where expenditures.
have been over-estimated, revenues under-estimated, or

potential surpluses.

Contract negotiations.

COUNCIL 82 FACT SHEET

THE FOLLOWING IS THE IMPORTANT FACTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPILED TO

DATE BY COUNCIL 82 IN ANSWER TO TUFCO ALLEGATIONS: a

GENERAL DECLARATION:

It is easy for someone to make false and unfounded statements about
an organization when they know they don't have to prove or substantiate
those statements. It is easy to criticize and take "pot shots" at an
organization, and then say how great the new organization is going to be
without having to come out and explain their own structure.

Council 82 was reluctant to even recognize TUFCO, but reconsidered when the
lies and unfounded statements, half truths, and fairy tale fantasy woven by
TUFCO reached a point to endanger the well being of every officer in the
state.

One can ignore slander and lies for only so long. Hundreds of
dedicated union leaders of Council 82 are being lied about, and knowing
what is behind TUFCO and their intentions has brought Council 82 to the
decision to let it be known to all its union members the truth and the
facts they should know about TUFCO. |

COUNCIL 82 WILL DO THIS TRUTHFULLY AND IRREGARDLES OF HURTING .
TUFCO'S FEELINGS. THE TRUTH IS THE TRUTH, AND A LIE IS A LIE, NO MATTER

HOW HARD TUFCO TRIES TO TURN IT AROUND.

TUFCO ALLEGATION:

1. C82 cannot be challenged from within.
2. C82 is ruled by an elite.
3. C82 is controlled by a relatively small group of people

4. C82 members do not have a direct vote.

COUNCIL 82 FACTS:

The COUNCIL 82 structure and democratic election process answers
the four allegations, but let it be known that the same present leaders or
directors of TUFCO all have held office at one level or another within the
COUNCIL 82 structure and had no objections to it. Infact, when another
organization several years ago tried to challenge this same structure of
democratic elections, those same leaders came out and fought against that
alien organization. The TUFCO leaders didn't complain until they lost an
election or were not even nominated to hold a position. Then the structure
and democratic election process of COUNCIL 82 was inferior. It was no good
because the present TUFCO leaders couldn't get elected through a democratic
election process, couldn't get elected by the majority, couldn't get
elected by their own peers, the hundreds of union leaders of COUNCIL 82

located throughout the state of New York. Oh, how bruised their egos must

be.

Now the "malcontents" (their own definition) figured they could
only hold high office in one way. Organize their own union, and they did.
They self-appointed themselves as directors for a term of five years.
Their first approach was to sell insurance. Not only did the member who
Signed up for insurance get insurance, he received membership into TUFCO.
Only, in most cases he didn't realize his signature was for the latter.

This fact sheet will let you know why some of the present leaders

of TUFCO had a hard time getting elected within the COUNCIL 82 structure.

And it says a great deal for the democratic process of COUNCIL 82. Like

Watergate, they said it proves the system works.

The COUNCIL 82. structure and democratic election process (the same
process TUFCO leaders became a part of and endorsed, until they couldn't
get elected or couldn't hold high’enough office in, or held high office
only to be not slecked next term) begins at the facility level. Each
facility forms a Local Union called the Local, and is assigned a number.
The MEMBERS of each facility elect their Local union representives through
an open election. All MEMBERS have the opportunity to vote and to
nominate. From President to Exec. Board members. The Local union have
their own autonomy. Their own constitution. The members of each facility
discuss and vote on their own issues or issues that will go to the council
level.

The local union leaders (elected by the members) participate in the
Annual Council 82 Convention. At the Council 82 Convention the local union
leaders attend with the local facility members position on Council 82
issues, amendments to Council 82 Constitution, on nominations, and the
voting stand for Council 82 Convention elections.

This democratic process of local and council elections are
Conducted on an ongoing basis. New leadership, new concepts, all continue
to improve the Council 82's responsiveness to membership concerns. |

Does the system work? At the past Council 82 Convention in
September of 1983 the Council Executive Board was dhenged with 15 new board
members elected. Nine new members from corrections.

Correction leadership at Council 82 is comprised of hundreds of
years of combined correction experience; democratically elected from the
rank and file membership. Who better knows the problems confronting the

correction officers. ~

In fact, Council ‘82 is comprised of 27 elected officials, 16 from

corrections, including the President, Vice President, and two trustees.
The Exec. Director and Assoc. Director are appointed by the elected
officials of the Exec. Board. Both of these positions are held by former
correction officers with — of experience in corrections and unions.
The same can be said for the other positions listed, including the
President of the Council.

Overall! There are three hundred and ten plus (310 +) elected

union leaders representing Council 82. Three hundred and twenty six (326

+) plus total!

TUFCO HAS FIVE DIRECTORS, ALL SELF APPOINTED FOR A FULL FIVE YEAR
TERM. WHAT MEMBERS HAD INPUT, NOT TO SPEAK OF A DEMOCRATIC VOTE, TO THIS

NICE SMALL ELITE GROUP?

WHAT ABOUT TUFCO STRUCTURE? WHY WON'T THEIR LEADERS PROVIDE
MEMBERS WITH COPIES OF THEIR STRUCTURE, BY-LAWS, CONSTITUTION, HOW WILL THE

MEMBERS GET TO VOTE, WHO WILL NOMINATE?

SOME REASONS TUFCO DOESN'T SPREAD THIS INFORMATION AROUND IS
BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT THEIR NEW MEMBERS (SIGNED INSURANCE CARD) TO KNOW
HOW MANY JOBS AND DIFFERENT POSITIONS HAVE BEEN PROMISED THROUGHOUT THE

STATE. IF TUFCO WERE TO HAVE AN ELECTION, ONE WONDERS WHAT THE ELECTION

WILL BE ABOUT.

IF TUFCO LETS THE MEMBERS KNOW WHAT THEIR STRUCTURE IS GOING TO BE
ONE MAY BE SURPRISED TO DISCOVER THE LARGE NUMBER OF ORGANIZED REGIONS, AND

TERRITORIES, AND SUB-GROUPS, AND BUSINESS MANAGERS, AND ASSITANT TO

ASSITANT, ETC. THERE ARE! MAYBE THIS WILL TELL YOU SOMETHING ABOUT THE

NUMBER OF POSITIONS THE PROMISES HAVE TO COVER.

COUNCIL 82: continues to be and always will be DEMOCRATIC in their
elections. There are 326 plus union leaders representing you the member to

be sure of that. HOW MANY WILL BE SURE THE TUFCO ELECTIONS ARE DEMOCRATIC?

TUFCO ALLEGATION:

1. Should you be loyal to a union that has been disloyal to you?

2. Council 82 has broken its covenant with its membership.

COUNCIL 82 FACTS:

Let's talk about loyalty.

COUNCIL 82 is comprised of dedicated union people elected by the
members to represent them the best way they know how to make COUNCIL 82 a
strong and credible union that cannot be treated but with-respect by the
State of New York. COUNCIL 82 is also comprised of the membership, for the

membership. Anyone that says different is either blind or organizing their
own union!
See the individual listing of benefits obtained by COUNCIL 82 and

you will see what the loyal leadership of COUNCIL 82 has accomplished!

DARE WE ASK ABOUT THE LOYALTY OF SOME OF THE TUFCO LEADERS, SOME OF

THE PRESENT DIRECTORS OF TUFCO? YES, AND WE ASK YOU TO ASK THEM, FACE TO

FACE.

ASK THEM, WHO HAD FORMED A NEGOTIATING SERVICE WHILE HOLDING OFFICE

IN COUNCIL 82 AND THEN NEGOTIATED AGAINST OUR SISTER UNION, COUNCIL 66, BY
REPRESENTING MANAGEMENT IN THE VILLAGE OF CATSKILL! MEMBERS OF COUNCIL 66
PROTESTED THIS ACTION THROUGH COUNCIL 82 EXECUTIVE BOARD AND AFSCME.

JIM MORRISSEY WAS CHAIRMAN OF CORRECTION POLICY AND ON THE COUNCIL
82 EXEC. BOARD WHEN HE CHAIRED A PARTICULAR MEETING IN WHICH DENNIS
FITZPATRICK WAS PRESENT REPRESENTING GREAT MEADOW LOCAL. THE MEMBERSHIP OF
CORRECTION POLICY ASKED MR. MORRISSEY TO STOP NEGOTIATING AGAINST CATSKILL

AND COUNCIL 66.

MR. MORRISSEY AND MR. FITZPATRICK BOTH TOOK THE STAND THAT WHAT
pared fen tornae}
THEY DID OUTSIDE OF COUNCIL 82 WAS THEIR’ BUSINESS.

CLINTON CORRECTIONAL FACILITY EXEC. BOARD ASKED FOR THE RESIGNATION
OF MR MORRISSEY. A COPY OF THIS LETTER WAS SENT TO ALL LOCALS IN THE
STATE. MR. MORRISSEY REFUSSED TO STEP DOWN AND CONTINUED TO NEG. AGAINST
COUNCIL 66. MR. DENNIS FITZPATRICK ALSO CONTINUED.

THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THAT BOTH JIM MORRISSEY AND DENNIS
FITZPATRICK WENT ABOUT THE STATE OF NEW YORK ASKING OTHER VILLAGES AND
COUNTIES FOR A JOB AS NEGOTIATORS USING THE FORMER DIRECTOR OF THE
GOVERNORS OFFICE OF EMPLOYEE RELATIONS, SANDY FRUCHER, ASST. DEP. COMM. OF
CORRECTION, WILLIAM COLEMAN, AND THE MAYOR OF CATSKILL, AS REFERENCES ON

THEIR RESUME'S. THEY USED THEIR UNION BACKGROUND AND KNOWLEDGE FOR

MANAGEMENT IN NEGOTIATIONS.

HOW CAN THESE TWO PEOPLE ASK COUNCIL 82 ABOUT LOYALTY, EVEN SUGGEST
ANYTHING ABOUT COUNCIL 82 NOT BEING LOYAL. AND THEY WONDER WHY THEY COULD
NOT GET ELECTED TO HOLD FURTHER OFFICE IN THIS UNION. MR. MORRISSEY WAS

SUCESSFUL IN BEING RE-ELECTED AS PRESIDENT OF AUBURN, BUT LATER RESIGNED TO

HELP ORGANIZE TUFCO.

BUT, WE CAN GO ON ABOUT LOYALTY. ASK MR. DENNIS FITZPATRICK, WHO

WHILE HOLDING OFFICE IN COUNCIL 82, AND BEING A MEMBER OF THE NEGOTIATING
TEAM FOR THE 1979 - gt CONTRACT DID IN FACT GO TO LAS VAGAS DURING THE 1979
STRIKE, AND DID NOT GET FINED FOR THE DAYS HE WAS IN LAS VAGAS. THIS IS A

UNION LEADER?

ALSO, MR KEVIN CASEY, ANOTHER MEMBER OF .GREAT MEADOW LOCAL UNION, A
MEMBER OF THE NEG. COMMITTEE, AND ONE OF THE LEADERS OF CORR. POLICY LEFT
Borp-vErmens.TWO DAYS BEFORE THE TENTATIVE AGREEMENT WAS REACHED. ALSO,
DURING THE STRIKE, WHERE WAS HE? MR. CASEY WANTED THE STRIKE, BUT COULD HE

FACE 17? Ne was (eh YernmemT.

THIS IS A UNION LEADER?

GETTING BACK TO MR. MORRISSEY, THERE IS AT PRESENT A LAWSUIT OF
$500,000 DOLLARS AGAINST MR. MORRISSEY FOR FAILURE TO REPRESENT FEMALE co's

AT AUBURN.

BRUCE FARRELL, ANOTHER TUFCO LEADER, WHEN A MEMBER OF 1982-85

NEGOTIATING TEAM LEFT TO BECOME SGT. PRIORITIES? A UNION LEADER?

It is possible the State of New York wants a challenage so they can
improve their bargaining position during the next negotiations. Remember
the pressure is on concerning C.O. transfers, senority, job bidding,
workers compensation, article 8, discipline, and — at 5 pl's. Just
to name a few. We must maintain these benefits!

Most of the TUFCO leaders held positions in this council. If their
ideas had merit and their leadership valid; then the Local Unions of
Council 82 would not have voted them out of office. This happen, and it

was done in a democratic manner so change could be made. THE FACT IS, ~

TUFCO LEADERS were ineffective while holding office in Council 82.

What covenant was broken with membership? All issues presented to
the COUNCIL have been addressed. Maybe not all resolved to our
satisfaction, but efforts — been and will continue to be made through
Grievances, Labor Management, and by Legal means whenever possible.

If we were always sucessful, then there wouldn't be a need for a
union or a contract. COUNCIL 82 Staff work on a full-time schedule

addressing membership needs.

TUFCO ALLEGATION:

1. COUNCIL 82 HAS LOST TOUCH WITH ITS MEMBERS.

COUNCIL 82 FACTS:

Just the opposite! COUNCIL 82 has increased it communications with
the membership and local leadership. They publish the Review, along with
the Quality of Work Life insert, "The Connection". They have hired a
full-time Public Relations man, increased staff, conduct Presidents
meetings, Policy meetings, Legislative meetings, Local union seminars,
Exec. Board meetings. Also, Council 82 staff attend grievance hearings,

local labor/management meetings, and membership meetings. Staff are on

call seven days a week.

TUFCO ALLEGATION:

1. COUNCIL 82 dues are excessive.

2. What do you get for your money?

COUNCIL 82 FACTS:

COMPARE COUNCIL 82 DUES with other unions, the Teamsters, auto
workers, trades, etc. The COUNCIL 82 dues are much lower.

COUNCIL: 82 dues maintain the staff and office space needed. Pays
for the increased communications with its members, the Review, etc. Pays
for the large legal expenses ood in-house attorneys, plus the services of
the best Labor Attorneys in the country, Rowley & Forest), the increased

Public Relations staff, negotiations, field staff, new computer operations

to be installed in near future, grievence expenses, legislative staff, and

arbitrations, to name a few.
Also, monies are returned on a monthly basis to each local union
for their operational and service costs. The money reinbursed is computed
on a per capita formula.
Another percentage is sent to the International union. Council 82

will issue a special listing of the benefits, both monetary and in services

received.

Even though dues for membership with Council 82 is low for the
services and expendures needed for maintaining a strong and financially
responsible union, TUFCO has painted a picture of fantasy in regard to sine:
they will give in benefits and charge in dues. Infact, if you read —e
literature carefully, they contradict themselves: Under additional benefits
to be provided by Tufco Union, section #5, it shakes, "TUFCO Union will
provide its members with a statewide prepaid legal program." Now they
stated, PREPAID, that should mean a legal program paid by the union. Yet,

in the next two sentences they state with key words, "This program will

provide group rates for legal representation..... ," and, "Such a program

will guarantee you legal representation by a competent attorney practicing

in your area at reasonable rates." The PREPAID program is prepaid except

for the group rates andthe reasonable rates.

Throughout the TUFCO literature we will ask the questions that need
to be asked, then you make your own analysis about their benefits,

services, and dues structure.

TUFCO ALLEGATION:

1. C82 is controlled by a chosen few, thus excluding the rank and

file from meaningful input into the workings of the Union.

COUNCIL 82 FACTS:

We have already addressed this above, but it should be said that
COUNCIL 82 is controlled by the ELECTED LEADERSHIP, LOCAL AND COUNCIL
si. si Exec. Board, which reviews all policy and procedures of the
Council, and by the Constitution with its amendments and by-laws.

COUNCIL 82 will not be controlled by a select few, self-appointed,

with no known established Constitutiion or structure.

TUFCO ALLEGATION:

1. C82 is a passive union with no specialized representation for

specialized needs of co's.

COUNCIL 82 FACTS:

COUNCIL 82 is not a passive union, we have taken many legal actions
against the State of N.Y. and OSHA, and will continue to do so. A review
of the 1982 - 85 Contract would show the difference between COUNCIL 82 and
other Public employee unions. We maintained 13 sick days, 5 personal leave
days, Workers Compensation from day one, senority, and job bidding system.

With membership support we have become a union that will stand up

for its rights and has spent millions of dollars in legal actions to prove

Lt» ADIS
surely has many connotations, but passive isn't one of them.

Specialized services? We read what TUFCO'S is going to be: They

say they wll be a specialized union, a union which can provide for the
mr ncnelin( idee needs se a specialized group. Sorry, but once again TUFCO
makes a statement with no detail or structure. Maybe the non-union printer
they use for their publications left something out?

You can see and read our combined list of services and benefits

compiled on a separate sheet.

TUFCO ALLEGATIOIN:

1. Representation provided by COUNCIL 82 on the local level has

been inconsistent and passive.

COUNCIL 82 FACTS:

The Local Union members elect their local leaders and they are
given the best of representation by the Council. Experienced field staff
are on daily call for assistance, and will supply professional assistance
when requested by the local. The action and attitudes of the council are

not passive as detailed above. There is no deviation of action or attitude

toward the local union when help is requested.

TUFCO ALLEGATION:

1. COUNCIL 82 has failed to deliver the best possible package of

benefits for its members.

COUNCIL 82 FACTS:

Just read the last contract, and compare to any other public

employee union. Infact, compare the wages and benefit package with the
auto an the other private sector unions, compare with the steel

43¢ %> 8S

industry / Compare this present contract with the one before, the one in

which present TUFCO leaders were members of the negotiation team. Go back

farther, COMPARE!

ONCE AGAIN TUFCO TALKS WITH FOOT IN MOUTH. ISN'T IT EASY TO SPREAD

LIES ON PAPER AND NOT HAVE TO PIN POINT YOUR ALLEGATIONS.

TUFCO ALLEGATION:

1. COUNCIL 82 has failed to provide adequate wages and benefits for

those correction officers with less service.

COUNCIL 82 FACTS:

New Hires have not lost any benefits under the present contract.
Starting salary is $14,200, after 6 months $15,000. After one year grade
14 hiring rate $20,000 plus in 1984. Receives uniform allowance, line-up
pay, nite differential, $150.00 after 10 weeks, and whatever other benefits

provided by contract to all employees. Only article 8 does not apply to

the new hire.

TUFCO ALLEGATION:

1. TUFCO is led by a dedicated group of correction officers with

many years of union service.

COUNCIL 82 FACTS:

This has already been addressed, but lets review the dedicated

group of leaders of TUFCO: Jim Morrissey: Neg. contract against sister

union council 66 for management of the village of Catskill. Also, being
sued for not representing the female C.0.'s at Auburn.

Dennis Fitzpatrick: Negotiated contract against sister
union council 66 for management of the village of Catskill. Ask him where
he was during the 79 strike, even though he was the union leader at Great
Meadow, Correction Policy, and on the negotiation team. Now a sgt. at
Great Meadow.

Also, signed a statement concerning an incident by a DOCS transportation
sgt.
The signed statement helped the Sgt. to be charged and was disciplined.

Bruce Farrell, left the negotiation team to become Sgt.

Kevin Casey, ask him where he was during the strike.

e
Compare the years of correction experience gf COUNCIL 825 | Ae,
(leadership) ;to the leadership of TUFCO. How about over 500 combined years

just on the Exec. Board alone.

TUFCO ALLEGATION:

1. TUFCO can serve you better within its dues structure (does not

have to send vast sums of money to a national of international union.

COUNCIL 82 FACTS: .

eS Cnt

TUFCO ALLEGATION:

1.TUFCO has established a streamlined legal structure. Will be an

open system controlled by the members themselves, not a chosen elite. Will

guarantee a democratic one man - one vote system of union government.

COUNCIL 82 FACTS:

COUNCIL 82 has one of the best legal structured systems now in

place. COUNCIL 82 already has a democratic one man, one vote system of
union government. . - W
? iF iT HAs BES

WHAT IS THE TUFCO LEGAL STRUCTURE? i HAS=Be ESTABLISHED, SO WHY

NOT SHARE IT FOR COMPARISON.

TUFCO ALLEGATION:

1. TUFCO is structured as a specialized union, a union which can
provide for the specialized needs of a specialized group such as security

and correction personnel. It is not controlled by a distant bureaucracy.

COUNCIL 82 FACTS:

WHAT IS THE SPECIALIZED STRUCTURE? HOW WILL. TUFCO BE CONTROLLED?
WILL IT BE CONTROLLED BY BUSINESS AGENTS, OR A REGIONAL OFFICE THAT WILL

COMMUNICATE WITH THE HOME OFFICE AND THE BUSINESS AGENTS, AND THE GUY IN

BETWEEN THEM. MAYBE THE HOME OFFICE WILL COMMUNICATE WITH THE BUSINESS

AGENT WHILE THE REGIONAL LEADER IS DEALING WITH THE OTHER GUY?

COUNCIL 82 does provide specialized services and needs to its
members. Each groups problems are assessed and responded to accordingly.
Distant bureaucracy? Every facility has a local union that is elected by
the rank and file membership. They have years of experience in dealing
with the problems of corrections and they are available at all times to

give the services and needs of the local membership.

TUFFCO ALLEGATION:

1.TUFCO provides a comprehensive system of local representation to
be staffed by professional business agents. There will be frequent access

and communication between the locals and Union Headquarters in Albany.

COUNCIL 82 FACTS:

TUFCO JUST MADE AN ALLEGATION THAT COUNCIL 82 IS CONTROLLED BY A
DISTANT BUREAUCRACY. CRITICIZED COUNCIL 82'S STRUCTURE. BUT YES! TUFCO

BuT oT
WILL HAVE A UNION HEADQUARTERS IN ALBANY (DISTANT BUREAUCRACY?) WILL/HAVE

LOCALS, VWwms- |

Fac Vi .
THE Becat, WILL HAVE BUSINESS AGENTS, HOW MANY, WHO WILL THEY BE, ARE THEY
GOING TO BE PAID A SALARY? SINCE THEY ARE PROFESSIONAL PEOPLE THEY MUST BE
HIRED, AND BE NON-CORRECTION PEOPLE, BUT THEY WILL BE THE ONE HANDLING YOUR

PROBLEMS IN THE PRISONS. JUST ONE TO A LOCAL? COUNCIL 82 believes the

local elected officials should also be co-workers with the membership.

COUNCIL 82 is located throughout the state of New York! COUNCIL
82 has a min. of seven union representives at each local. In most cases at

least ten or more. Forty-four locals plus in corrections. At present,

with the field staff on daily call, every region of the state is covered

with its own staff representive.

The central office in Albany is installing a computer system that

will improve services and communications with all union leaders throughout

the state. Dba Sey sD hao bew pn duck wnt Fo~
ree yes .

fASCme has | fst Cosel To “5 be Orere soK

TUFCO ALLEGATIONS:

1.TUFCO can provide tax attorneys, certified public accountants,
and pension consultants, a comprehensive program of insurance coverage and

other benefits atj/great savings}to the membership.
ED

COUNCIL 82 FACTS:

AeT At Free Fear _

pe a

TUFCQ ALLEGATIO

1.TUPCO will b Sitive t needs ‘of all’of it’s members,

of/service

COUNCIL 82 CTS:

TUFCO ALLEGATION:

1.COUNCIL 82 is uncomfortable as this challege period approaches.

COUNCIL 82 FACTS: Sue]
nein

/é

TUFCO SERVICES:

TUFFCO will provide you with an attorney to represent you at all
major disciplinary proceedings. Will provide a professional outside
negotiator at contract time. Council 82 has been outgunned and outmanned
by experts who have provided service to the State. TUFFCO will establish a
statewide "disaster fund" in order to assist correction officers and their
families who are in need. Will establish a system of Educational
Scholarships. Will provide its.members with a statewide prepaid legal
program. Will provide a comprehensive program of tax and retirement
planning services. Will provide lower rates for life insurance and
disability insurance. Will undertake a comprehensive public relations

Campaign. Will have a computer system. Will have a one man one vote

State-wide election for our State-wide leadership.

COUNCIL 82 FACTS:

COUNCIL 82 SERVICES:

Jo: FRank : —_ il

cua! SOE PuMKA

S UBIET TELEPHEVE ConpueRnSATin WITH Coy TRIMBLE w/v f ey
—— TRAWEE LOS TJosePH : O.5.T, C AvbueD WTIMIOATCO 12TO
Si6GKiWGS T.U.F.C.6. Gnep Sy TJ. pe ty SR.
DJoscPru HALO THAT THunte ARE CvTOMWAL PaeblemsS (0 ZU,F-C.O,

LLROOLS HP

~ “Down STATE C.0,. BoUFFARD (4D COM UE SAT ow wf J. VASME =
(=. BD. Memoow 9 FISHKiE’d ) ‘@) A LOCAL Ba? MADE CxoHMOwT s
7o THE FFT TwWaT FITZ PATE + FARRER ARE FIGHTS

: Cees eae . Fit2 Patvace TRkinG FAReeRe HE SHovlta Key

HiS MouTtH SHUT of HE wite HYtT THE ORGANI Tew (TY. F-C. 0. )

—— Ron EDwaeos Baotums week @ Swe swE (we7T vniww .
OFFiCiacS ) BoT Wee RESPEC TLO (v SVG SWE. CoWT Ateuwo
- - No
(FACILITY sa al Dio A (ME oAMAT SUR nal i P LiT7Te OL Alantet TUF CSC.
SUPPORT BUT ANT MUCH Pro C-¥2 ElTwert . .

mr “SQer Thy CANDELO ( V.P. CAavoero CG Hvosey = SouT
A LET Tere To Cinoy ASKING For A CoPy $f. Hee. LaST
oF C-$2 FACTS eet Hun HUStAWO UP nonTH Te post

Dian T MEWTion W HEE HE Woes , (we Kieu 478 ww0Sen »)

| CIROY SPokKE TO 20 Tenwes G@ FISHKKL THEY WAKTEO

MORE IMFO OW TUF C0 Tatey KHE2RT THY Wine YIISIMFILAOO ,

—

TRA) VEE M “Kinny WANTED 7O KNOW How SHE Covco REVOKE

; at 4 S16NWE :
Hod Memercsn(P. SHE was INTMiWOATED (LTO See A CAeLdD.

€ -
TRAIWGES SPOKE OF PIZZA PARTIES ZEIWE

CH Rez)
By "(Oy FLO
menrnneiall CO. MiIGLIANTi (F isn) COM FrevToo E. OEAN , R. CDW AROS
+ Coy TLAIMALE WHILE TAKING A Tovkr OF FACET He os
OvuT oC AVBURA) Fatima AWVBUAN Ha x/ (Cc COMMiWIT S MADE
——— —
a — .
¢
CiWwoy — SCAB 5 EQ0WAROS -— NOT €ELECTEO HE ys FEO S
FLUNK Y » ~ THts HAPPEWED /A) THE MESS Hace Jd (FRoVT
OL IMMATES AWD MiCLiaNnTe weovTe Te/Frem TO ‘
WATCH Comm, SAY WE E.D06e4AV + Clo. (MTER FENCED WITH

His DUTIES AS A C.0, —— Hasn't Gone se WHing

HE S#ib HE tS Aw ASS HoLEe — Toroecn “Y 4UBUR2ZY)
#¢
Mer FiSHKic’ ,

4.4. Downe Fo e

”

VAD HovToEew Ga Tv. AC, 6.)

3 ¢,.o,"s OW VAM HeTin) — PENSowAe Fercour TAKeW

| ak i> MtCH7FT Men CH4ateces ——

I Le yy ree

COUNCIL 82

nt Of fr

TO: Theodore C. Reid, Superintendent 7 APR1 ‘71984 ii
WN mecngei
FROM: Ronald Edwards, Acting President/Local 1255 \ A eal

AFSCME AFL-CIO
DATE: April 5, 1981

Sir: I am writing to thank vou for allowing our
Staff Representative, Mr. Edward Dean to tour the facility
yesterday afternoon.

Mr. Dean was escorted by myself, Cindy Trimble and
James Vasile. When the tour was over, we all felt that it
was a success.

There is,however, one incident I would like to make
vou aware of, fust as a point of information.

We toured the Main Building last. Our tour began at
approximately 2:35 p.m. and was completed at approximately
4:00 p.m. As we entered the Dining Room of the Main Building,
Officer Henry Miglianti was obviously prepared for us to
arrive. Fe began by calling Cindy Trimble a scab, followed
by telling me I was not an elected official of the local, but
rather appointed along with other insinuations. He continued
with statements regarding T.U.F.C.0. and among other accusations,
directed toward the four () of us, he announced loudly in
front of several inmates that we were, "Reid's flunkies". He
finished with thumbing his nose at us and making further remarks
as he walked away.

The reason I would like to make note of this, i8 that
I am annoyed that it was done in the ovresence of several inmates.

I would also like to brine to your attention, the attached
posters, of which I have taken down from several areas of the
facility, including the Key Office window and our bulletin boards.

Perhaps a rule should be instituted that all material
to be vosted on the miscellaneous bulletin board, such as ad-
vertisements, announcements for parties, etc. should be signed

or initialed by the Watch Commander to avoid further suggestive
remarks.

Resvectfully submitted,

Ronald Fdwards
Acting President/Local 1255

RF/emt

Fd Dean notified, letter read to him and he concurs. 4/5/21

|
Le [0 PVaAUys WIT |”
DIG UCU TVYTIDIV YUH ‘LO&LUOD

7? WOQDOL dabor ie sue enken TK HICE,

Mb LY (aou1d SOzUY UW) ‘SFYVOULM], “ota 5
a\e1—en & =,
ww? } sy aye \ods'd

LYANVD QOAVYZZTd +Yadd SHL Ty Tee

yo WICC! €! TING} ' AVOTY

ont os, ee A\t Vd L4 [ ' 3
WBOXQ As

= Yds

ie aan VZ71d* Ydad |

TO: Richard J. Bischert, President/Council 82

FROM: Ronald Edwards, Acting President/Local 1255
James Daniels, Treasurer/Local 1255
Cindy M. Trimble, Executive Board Member/Local L255

DATF: April 16, 1981

SUBJECT: Security Procedures at Fishkill Correctional Facility

Please be advised that on Saturday evening, April 14,
1984, we, as officials of Fishkill Local 1255 received telephone
calls informing us that officers on our afternoon shift were
utilizing a security procedure to solicit for The United Federation
of Correction Officers.

Attached is a memorandum from our former Deputy Super-
intendent for Security Services, Roy E. Black pertaining to Half
Hour Security Calls. In this memorandum, you will note, numbers
are to be used as codes. Since 1974 this policy has been in
effect at this facility. Up until this time, this procedure has
been followed with no problem or confusion.

Both Saturday, April 14, 1984 ana Sunday, April 15, 198
this procedure was chanred by the followers of T.U.F.C.0. The
word was put out by them to pay close attention to the Security
Calls as there was a message in them. On Saturday evening, the

message was T.U.F.C.0O. and on Sunday evening, the message was
Ga Uelle lw cats t's

On Monday, April 16, 1984, Ronald Edwards, James Daniels
and Cindy Trimble went to see Superintendent Theodore C. Reid and
Deputy Superintendent Carmine Piacente. We made them aware of the
Situation and provided both of them with copies of the memorandum,
in addition to the log sheets which are kept for these half-hour
Security Calls (please see attached).

We explained to them our feelings regarding this issue.
We also stressed the importance of correcting matters which violate
facility security procedures. They were both in full agreement with
us and stated that something would be done.

In addition to bringing this matter to their attention,
Ronald Edwards presented a Sign which he removed from the Mess Hall
wall early on the morning of April 16, 1984. The sign had obviously
been made from materials obtainable in our Industry Shop. The sign
Stated, "VOTE T.U.F.C.0O." and was surrendered to the Superintendent.

The information provided as to the officer making the
Security Calls on Saturday evening was that of one female officer,
Alicia Boyce. This female officer was received at Fishkill Correctional
Facility on January 13, 1983 and was given Facility Orientation by
Cindy Trimble at which time was instructed on the proper procedure
for Half-Hour Security Calls.

hm L- ie:

Acting President/Local 1255

nce logic

James W. Daniels
Treasurer/Local 1255

Executive/Board Member/Local 1255

/emt

ce: John W. Burke, Executive Director/Council 8&2
Joseph Puma, Correction Policy Chairman/Council 82
Edward Dean, Staff Representative/Council 82

‘

‘
NS . . i. = fs .
en) Es 5 ¥_\ } : At.

‘ ’ “J KA tN X
Cre
sm C.- Ay NS a ine i D>) a) - we

SECURITY RECOMMENDATIONS

Security Calls (Code answering system)

Security Calls are to be made to the Key Office each
half hour from 7:00 P.M. to 6:00 A.M. seven days a

week.

Each half hour wnen the ward officer calls the Key
Office, the switchboard operator will tell the ward
officer a number. Numbers should not be in any nun-
erical sequence and a different number will be used
each half hour to maintain confidentiality. Each
time the ward orficer makes a security call to the
switchboard he will give the ward # and the code #
(Wd 11-23). The switchboard operator will then give
the ward officer a new security code # to be used

for the next security call. A memo was issued on
June 5, 1974 regarding security calls: "Whenever a
ward does not make a security call to the switch-
board operator, the switchboard operator will inmedi-
ately notify the supervisor, the switchboard operator
will not call the ward. The supervisor on duty will
immediately investigate to determine why the required
security call was not made."

One officer will be in the immediate vicinity of the
phone at all times, so that in the event of an emer-
gency he can use the phone without unnecessary delay.

Other custodial personnel assigned to ward will continue
normal activities concerning welfare and safety of pati-
ents.

At no time should all the officers assigned to the werd
congregate in one area.

Recommendation is made that on each ward's dayroom and
dormitory there be constructed a screened in area 6 feet
by 6 feet enclosing the office door. This enclosure
Should be of chain link fencing or a similar material
and should have a door made of the same material as an
enclosure. The door will be equipped with a lock and
this lock should have a keyhole on the inside and a
blank plate on the outside, so that it can be opened
only by the officer inside the enclosure.

inn

b) In case of an incident, the officer in the enclosure
will call for help first, and if needed will assist,
if possible.

c) Alternate - On some wards the enclosed area would not
be situated properly to observe the ward. In this case

the phone could be moved to a better location and the
enclosure built at this location.

ROY E. BLACS
Deputy Superintendent for
Security Services

REB:by

; | —
— -
choo TU Feo -—

cereal

: <x
=~ = if Y, x? ‘ as
AZ SERRE RK
LXig Xx! 4 4

Be TLL LL LL ILD |
RB. BE. LEYS TI FLT TD I

'
34
| ' ' ‘ t i

SS
NG
S
N a
: MNS 7 t
SS
Ni
WN

NN HINA NANA ‘A
ARRAS J 1] SSS NN
INNIS TT ETELSNSSINSS ike?
SSN

Li |

hak
Se]
|
|
|

|
|
|

SAS
SV
aaen

NANAK

\AARARNN
SAN

\AAAANN \
! NS mN ; \i
IN
cs >» Bs By, i BB
NINAAINA .
|
|

NAN
NNS N

SX
he
NAA
SOS
Pie
NAN
SS

NN
NAN
NAA
AN NN?
NOR AIR A RNA]
SRQAYSS
ia Gia ee
\
ISS
AN
ana
Tho

\
RAN
SN
SQ

INNS
.

SINAAN
SN)

AA\\

|
|

N
N
N
N
N
Ni

NN
SKY
NN
\S
x
ss
-|-4
2)

ANN

\
N
RX&““a
aN
NX

ee ee a eee

= ey ee +

LL LIPLLALIPATA DDE

Wits EE Aenea

1625 L Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036
Telephone (202) 429-1000

To:__Ed Dean ___ From: Jim _ S (Yer Date _ 4/2/84

Re-___Training Programs f Lexa We Cx 82

Attached are the copies of the sign-in sheets I told
you I'd send. I'm also enclosing a copy of the TUFCO handout
I picked up at the Fishkill program. Thanks for helping out.

Call on me again.

JS:eg

cc: John P. Dowling
COUNCIL 82

Attachments

APRO 61984

itt thre public service

Be - GOS

SIGN-IN SHEET

S49

(ZA

ie NAME 7 | ” LOCAL = COUNCIL
ee | a ee ee
:
Kos ERcoLE ee
A: 9 LPO Ma? i 2 > <= |
Vote ns . _ “i #5 ts. _ | re.
r Wovcemarnr ” ice es 2
Si, eV _| veg |
aplineneee A EL ; Vp a
2 |
+ 7 %. Scdnede js z. ek OZ ee
_& )AZAnS aw oo Cice flex _aceenll
Nk bart en ee
——— —_— —_— — — — a — —_—_—_—_——— —— cin ea
ee ee ed
deci — = — ———_—— —— $$ << — “ a — i
_ a —_ : ee =

SIGN-IN SHEET y WIN

_——

FCAD ke Sises SC

. NAME

—<—<—<$<<_$_—

, ———_—_—_— — — —_ a ———— $$$

— — — — —_—- $$$ ——$__—_—__— ———_- ——_—— —— ——————

a _ ae i ee
———— —— — ———— ———-—— ——____—— _——____—_—__——

—__—_ —— ———— ——— — — —— —

—— —_—_—__— ——— ————— ———- —

— —— eee —— ——— -

—— = ———__—_—_————— oe _—_—_—_—___—— —E

—— —— _ ———

— ——— —_—_——_— —— —EEE

— —— —_—— — ——— —_——_ — —

TEIS ORGANIZATION THEY CALL T.U.F.C.O

When this organization was first formed, they claimed their foal
was to represent the.Correction Officer.

Since that time, they have been soliciting the Non-Correction
Groups. THATS RIGHT!, the same people that they claim to want

to break away from; Lifeguards, FnCon, Building Guards, Safety
Officers, ete.

It makes one wonder if their devotion is really with the Correction
Officers, or do they lack support or are they just power hungry?

For those who have been mislead with the notion that the Triboro
Doctrine will vrotect vour present benefits, this is also a sales
pitch. The Triboro Law allows benefits to be carried over until
the next contract is ratified. This is applied when you have the
same bargaining unit doing your negotiating, not during a challenge
period. EXAMPLE: .*
While Council 82 is negotiating your new contract,
the past benefits that Council 82 obtained for you
will continue past March 31st, until ratification
of the new contract by Council 82.

If T.U.F.C.0. attemnts to negotiate your contract,
after March 31st, what do we fall back on?

he ake wee Council 82's benefits? NO WAY!, and
thats from the Governors Office of Fmplovee Relations.

Once again, we should all very seriously consider what we may be
sacrificing.

CAN YOU AFFORD TO TAKE A CUT IN PAY?

CAN YOU DEAL WITH NO TRANSFER LIST OR BID SYSTEM? ASSIGNMENTS
SUBJECT TO THE DISCRETION OF THE ADMINISTRATION.

DO YOU WANT TO PAY FUJ.L PRICE FOR YOUR PRESCRIPTIONS?

IF YOU SEOULD GET HURT ON THE JOB, DO YOU WANT TO USE YOUR OWN
TIMF FOR THE FIRST TEN DAYS, LIKE C.S.E.A.?

DO YOU WANT TO GIVE BACK TWO OR THREE PERSONAL LEAVE DAYS, LIKE
P.E«hs DID?

INT OF INFORMATION:

DO YOU KNOW THAT T.U.F.C.0O. WANTS TO DO AWAY WITH LOCAL UNIONS.

NO GRIEVANCES. NO MONEY. A SMALL GROUP OF PEOPLE CONTROLLING

ALL TEE MONEY AT REGIONAL LEVELS, TELLING YOU IF YOU CAN HAVE

MONEY FOR CERISTMAS PARTIES OR OTEER EVENTS. SUBJECT TO TREIR
APPROVAL, AND WEO ARE TEOSE PFOPLE GOING TO BE..... ELFCTED OR
APPOINTED. _

TEEY ALSO WANT TO APPOINT CHIEF STEWARDS AT EACH FACILITY (ONE)
EO WILL BE ON FULL TIME UNION LEAVE WITH SALARY PLUS FXPENSES.:
WEO ARE THOSE PEOPLE GOING TO BE.......... WHO APPOINTS TEEM?

z ¢ te

TO THF MEMBERS OF LOCAL 1255:

RECENTLY A LOT OF T.U.F.C.O. LITFRATURF BAS REFN CIRCULATED. ARF
yor! AVARE, SHOULD TPEY EVFR PFCOMF. YOUR BARGAINING AGENT IN PLACE

OF COUNCIL 82, THAT #1 - THF AGREEMENT RETWEEN TEE STATE OF NFW YORK
AND COUNCIL 22, REFERRED TO AS OUR CONTRACT IS NO LONGER IN FFFFCT,
WEICFK RESULTS IN #2 - HAVING TO RE-NEGOTIATF. THE ENTIRE PACKAGE.
REFLOW IS A LIST OF SOME OF THOSE AGREEMENTS TEAT IT TOOK COUNCIL

2> APPROXIMATELY FOURTEEN (14) YEARS TO ATTAIN FOR THEIR MEMBERS

AND ARF SUBJECT TO LOSS SHOULD T.U.F.C.O. TAKE OVER:

1. Union Rights. Article 5

2. Grievance and Arbitration Procedures. Article 7

3. Disciplinary Procedures. Article 8

4, Out of Title Work. Article 9

5. Comnensation. Article 11
6. Fealth Insurance. (Optical Plan) Article 12
7. Dental Insurance. Articie le
8, Prescription cards. Article 12
Q, Vacation Leave. , . Article 11
10. Personal Leave. Article 14
ll. Sick Leave. : Article 14
12. Workers Compensation. Article 14
13. Time off for Civil Service Exems. Article 15
14, Uniform allowance. Article 20
15. Indemnification. Article 71
16. Reimbursement for property damage. Article 23
17. SENIORITY (Think about a%f) | Article 24

ARE YOU WILLING TO GIVE UP ANYTHING WE ALREADY FAVE? T.U.F.C.O.

MUST START FROM THE VERY BEGINNING WITH NOTHING AND TRY TO GET US

SOMETEING WF ALREADY HAVE. GOING BACKWARDS IS NOT THE ANSWER.

WE'VE GOTTEN THIS FAR, WE SHOULD MOVE AFEAD.

WHAT HAS COUNCIL 82’s bargaining done for you?

- A hell of a lot. Let’s just capsulize the highlights:

* In 1957, our job rate was keyed to grade 11. In 1966, we pushed it to grade12;in —
1970, to grade 13; in 1972, to grade 14.

* In 1971, our job rate was $9,000 a year. In. October it will be $24,827 including
line-up pay, which Council 82 negotiated, and uniform allowance, which Council 82
negotiated. For officers with longevity, it will be $27,095, more than triple the 1971

rate.

* Council 82 increased the trainee scale stunningly. Now an officer starts at
$14,200, gets 5.6 per cent more ($800) in six months and another 34.8 per cent ($5,214)
at the end of a year. This $6,014 raise amounts to $115.65 a week. Such increments are
almost unheard of in any other union, public or private sector!

* An officer hired in April, 1982, for $12,920 is now earning $20,572, a 59.2 per
cent increase. Do you know any one of your neighbors who got a 60 per cent raise in
the last two years?

JUST OFF THE PRESS
As of April 1, 1984, New Recruits:
15,052 First 13 Payroll Periods
15,900 Second 13 Payroll Periods

* Because of the effort of your Council 82 negotiating team, the present contract
increases base salaries 30 per cent in 30 months. No other public employee union can
make that boast. It would be ludicrous to think a new bargaining unit without depth
of experience and extremely limited financial resources could come anywhere near
this figure, much less surpass it.

* Governor Cuomo, addressing our 1983 convention, said he knew of “no union
that did more for its members” than Council 82. That’s hardly something he’d say
about an idle or do-nothing union,

__ . ® Health insurance, dental plan, GHI allowances, one-dollar co-pay drug pre-
scriptions and fully paid vision care: all were either initiated or vastly upgraded by ©
Council 82 negotiators in the current contract. And that’s just the frosting on a
tremendous economic cake. Spell that y-o-u-r S-a-l-a-r-y.

HOW ACCESSIBLE IS COUNCIL 82 ASSISTANCE TO YOU?

Totally accessible. Through your president, shop steward or an executive board
member on your shift, you can contact the Council’s staff representative for your
_Tegion. For questions on insurance, publications (such as the Review or assistance

on local newsletters) or unusual problems, you can call Council 82 headquarters
at (518) 489-8424 and talk to a union officer.

! COUNCIL 82, Security and Law Enforcement Employees

| John W. Burke — Richard J. Bischert
' Executive Director | President
63 Colvin Avenue . |
Albany, New York. 12206 em

(518) 489-8424 [=

Cee ee ae
That’s the Truth

Governor Cuomo, in his recerit address to the Pub- |
lic Employees Conference, described a government
employee. One of his few choices for a portrait: “the
| government (employee) is the correction officer who
| isn't paid enough to walk through Auburn withouta
| weapon among criminals who have proven their

| capability to kill.”

And who was the Governor addressing?

Officers of major state public employee

unions. Particularly, your Council Se.

gee ee MOSSE LAL EE BB ORL A LL ON

Fp NE 6 pene ECR ccimuiti

1onun
fm
(r

nt
~ 2am re
Ninna aL a aie ;

| Ths US Aqainst the Losers

a c
‘Sa a Se ines

BORE TF LDCR RIE IEME REG, RY OME

_——__—_—— —

I've worked as. a New York State correction officer for 23 years.
Eighteen of these years have been here in Attica. When I 7

started out in the correctional system, we didn't have a

ion. Officers were underpaid and completely under
was Camere s con only one difference

between the way they treated us and the way they treated the
prisoners. - - They let us go home at night. -

AESCME has.more than doubled our pay. The union has brought
some fairness into shift assignments, grievance systems, an
promotions. Above all, the union has given us a sense -of

igni he job. We're free working people, not prisoners
wenel hes. “We’ge made important progress with APSE» SS soe
still have a long way to go. This 1s one of the toughes : D
in America. I'm glad we have a tough union representing us.
— Charles Biggins
Correction Officer
Attica -

_- — —_—_—__—

wee

oe]

ate
. ote
a eer ee oe OY

.
an

- ere ree —-— =

At TUFCO Center

| -THEHUB CAPS"

OUR 45" SCREEN

, Plenty of Food &
Drink for Your

ry A Enjoyment.

return to a

‘jay he Best In aT Ra
ma Entertainment ““-.
| In The STUDY HALL LOUNGE }] |

"THURSDAY & FRIDAY NITE fat
“FRANKIE AND ~~ Gf

Sunday & Monday Night ‘ +
a WATCH YOUR FAVORITE @ &&
FOOTBALLTEAM.ON

ste aol
OT aT re ee
he

Rees
Bee

eat

a
a _

‘eo 3 Rate fe Se stew

| bea RS

f, sate ae Rises
‘ + ey Vena fi |

Ti
2]
Do Sa

Se 5 Approximately 70 attended the
-. installation, held at the TUFCO

installs = | B

‘3 ee eA

"SS HUDSON FALLS — Lodge. 1
sof The United ‘Federation of -|.

Shih ES ie et te CNS
eds $e Be
ae .

oe Ce?

- &. Blected ‘officers are: Arthur
~ Byers, ‘-president, Robert
_ LaFrance, vice president; Nick

‘Catalfamo, treasurer, and John
~”.<Brooks, ‘secretary. Dennis Fitz-
‘patrick is » chairman of .the
es Toard, and Thomas Campbell is

¥ $232
‘sok

‘delegate atlarge. .2° 8) 20 4°
Ae = SEB ong a NPs oe * &

“es %

isthe Board of Directors are:
“Ron Butler, Reginald Cote,
‘ Walter .Mylott Sr., Dave ‘|
Williams and Doug Williams. -
‘Trustees ‘are: «Kevin Casey,”

three-year .term; Joseph .)_ Ain

Trackey, ‘two ..years; and
William Ryerson, one year. ees

«public relations officers are:

‘Robert Doll, Mount McGregor;

“.SMatt Cronin, Great Meadow; *
"and Keith Brunelle, Washington

“County facility.

- lodge, Main Street. TUFCO
‘Lodge 1 meets at 7:30 p.m. the
third Tuesday of each month a

the lodge. fest Ne I

2 Bee os, ote. Ree ees £2

a 3 = tate ant” gta bl : ae SE

anit’

_}Census slated .
RAS Sen igh Wee des FOB way Ga 4
~s FORT EDWARD — Jane
Roberts, census enumerator for
Fort Edward Public Schools,
will conduct the school. district
>» census during July and August.

Soh Be eR ee 8 ic Pay

< .
— ie a ~—
- —
%
= »-
<
se «, o . ee od _
ease’ « ‘ak ‘

Don; f Miss Our 13th sSeuren |
OF DANCE & AEROBICS |

ja Pa seers

| ‘Classes in 5" un EEA, A. 7

ee Mees DANCE |
e Modern Jozz : ee Sia | mY we iaghsag SLE
-e Classical Ballet paged RIK oe E53 055

. Aerobics pe “ae

“e Gymnastics - wee Oe,

“s. energetics es iar S “y : .
AL. ‘TUFCO gon, emer

WY 5 of 22 u i te

‘ Professional iectroction’ on D Ee 27s
: A = EE ty

LY Byrnes t) .
o eer as 7 Mh bas # ste edie F Crier. .
5 i CRT

ot wet

in Dance Education att

Certified Instructors. *. Specializing In:
+ Adult classes

Darlene Bowe Adult classes oe
oat in 0 re-school “ope. 5
~Heidi Frantsi. | iS es Technique | Say

CLASSES START - S 4 Production Line work

* Stage Presence

he gue 4 Be oa ait ers ee oe Choreography ate
maha te aesee *s “For Registration: CALL “fish tT a
Pees = THE STUDIO __ 183 Broadway, Fort Edward oogat eae *
*@ (for Dance & Aerobics) 792- 0273 ir eae
TUFCO CENTER - 92 Main St., Hudson Falls "oo
A(For ee & Eriergetics Only) 747-6903
“ Post Sacer A759 -%S . :
is a ie a ‘ s 3 vs

S win October 26,1485
enter
a2 Moin ——
Hudson Falls. 1.U,
Hot + Cold Lom sake one hour

tors Doeuvres ‘now

Stasting ot 8.00pm.
Vie Mors: | 13.00 per persen

Seno p ec person $2 Shows onl RS
P ¢ Pe Ee te ‘

akony Seati'n
Reserved gees will be *oKen for
Ful\ Completa, tolles of 8B oc \6 people onlu.

~ Remerxs ON ailelo\e or TWA. 0. S Study

DAVE WwW!

Kal\\ Lounge, N47- -O\C2 oF coll ExT 339 -Lofiens
Bol Doll at 64G-4192

Metadata

Containers:: Box 1 (4-T.U.F.C.O. (The Union of Federated Corrections Off), Folder 10
Resource Type:: Document
Rights:: CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
Date Uploaded:: February 19, 2024

Using these materials

Access:: The archives are open to the public and anyone is welcome to visit and view the collections.

Collection restrictions:: Access to this record group is unrestricted with the exception of Series 3.
Collection terms of access:: The Department of Special Collections and Archives is eager to hear from any copyright owners who are not properly identified so that appropriate information may be provided in the future.

About the Archives

Access options

Ask an Archivist

Ask a question or schedule an individualized meeting to discuss archival materials and potential research needs.

Ask a Question Book a Meet

Schedule a Visit

Archival materials can be viewed in-person in our reading room. We recommend making an appointment to ensure materials are available when you arrive.

Schedule a Visit Hours

Collection

Council 82, Security and Law Enforcement Employees, American Federation of State, County, Municipal Employees Records, 1966-1989

Collection ID	apap066
Total components	406
Items available online	128
Last indexed	2025-10-27

Schedule a Visit

Collections

Charges and Counter Charges, 1984

Online content

Metadata

Using these materials

About the Archives

Access options

Ask an Archivist

Schedule a Visit

Collection

Council 82, Security and Law Enforcement Employees, American Federation of State, County, Municipal Employees Records, 1966-1989

Collection contents