|
 |
 |
|
| |
STRAIGHT TRACK
 |
Saturday, July 31, 2004 |
MAC's Chaiperson, Roger Griffeth sends his letter to US Attorney, Edward Gallagher seeking his help in unsealing the court records in the Little/Boyd/Rookard/Dennis case.
He receives a response that suggests that the particular records discussed "do not contain any new inormation or any allegations of wrongdoing by DLC or other union officials. The US Attorney DOES state that Boyd and Little executed sworn affidavits "concerning misconduct by other DLC or other union officials" and that these affidavits have been forwarded to Stephen R. Spivack, counsel for UTU. Gallagher advises us that we have "every right to request the UTU to publish the affidavits or report to the membership what action the UTU will take in response to the allegations contained in the affidavits."
Appropriately, Roger Griffeth sends UTU IP Thompson a request for this information. He also asks any UTU members who send a similar letter to the IP to forward a copy to him at griffethr@bellsouth.net
11:42:13 AM 
Google It!
|
|
Just when you thought it couldn’t get any more bizarre:
In Houston, Byron takes full responsibility and says he wasn’t a victim but . . . points the finger at FELA and . . . suggests the problem with corruption in the UTU starts at the BOTTOM!!! That’s right, at the local level where the corrupt FELA attorneys buy our votes and influence our union’s policies with free beer and pens.
It’s hard to run a labor organization like a corporation when the power base at the bottom of the pyramid has been bought and paid for by the DLCs. When Da Judge asks him, “So, you’re saying the DLCs control the 1oca1 union officials?”, Byron responds enthusiastically, “Absolutely, absolutely.” He then suggests that the authorities have to root deeply into the union in their ongoing investigation to get to the source of all this corruption and he commits himself to a life of service and cooperation with such an investigation.
I guess we all got it wrong. All you grunts out there prepare for a visit from an US Attorney coming to depose you. If you’ve ever accepted a free pen from a DLC be prepared to explain just what you gave him in return. And you thought the lawyers came to the meetings to spy and report back to Cleveland.
I guess this also means any possible high level co-conspirators in the criminal enterprise are off the hook as the feds go after source of the corruption; DLC, local officers and FELA.
Does any of this disturb you?
If so, consider joining UTU’s Members Against Corruption Caucus (MAC) by visiting
www.reformit2004.org
getting informed, and signing up with the only organized group of UTU members working to uncover the real story of past and possible ongoing corruption.
Also, please consider signing the online petition to get the Boyd/Little/Rookard/Dennis court records unsealed which can be found at
www.PetitionOnline.com/syzygy/
UTU posts sentencing transcripts of Boyd/Little/Rookard/Dennis at
www.utu.org/worksite/detail_news.cfm?ArticleID=15546
From Boyd Sentencing
THE DEFENDANT: Thank you, Your Honor. The first thing I need to say, and I want to say publicly, is I accept full responsibility for my actions. The shame and responsibility falls squarely on my shoulders, no one else.
The other thing about the tragedy of this whole event that I think is not so obvious to the word is the personal and private tragedy that I’ve caused a number of people, my fami1y and my close friends. We all know what the pub1ic outcome of it is.
Publicly I would like to apologize to my wife and my son and daughter, grandson and some very dear friends and members of the organization and other friends throughout the country who expressed their support. In trying to think of the words to use to ask for forgiveness or the apology, there’s only two words that come to mind and those are to them I say thank you for the love, kindness and support and I’m truly sorry and ashamed for my actions. And I have been overwhelmed by that support and particularly overwhelmed by the folks that I’ve sat across the table from and argued against my whole career and I’m truly amazed. I’m not entitled to it, but I’m gratified by it.
The other concern that I have is—and I wasn’t a victim. I was a participant in a perverse corruption and—
THE COURT: Let me ask you, what can be done to correct this scheme? The DLC program provides an inherent incentive for lawyers to be referred these very lucrative cases. How can this system be corrected to destroy or reduce that incentive?
THE DEFENDANT: My belief, Your Honor, is this, that—I think maybe to define one thing first and then I’ll answer your question, because I think the two go together. The system has gone on for generations. The system goes on as we stand here—or I stand here today. The system will go on tomorrow.
What needs to be done, in my opinion, is to look at the very genesis of the system. It just isn’t at the top level of the organization, but at the bottom level of the organization. I know from dealing with the politics and the inside of the organization that there’s a huge amount of control that’s generated by these DLCS, and you have to be able to counter that. And the way you have to counter that, I think, is with the abi1ity for government to get in and have the knowledge and understanding and to follow the trails that need to be followed and where they go to get to the core base, the political base of these DLCs within the organization. And I would say this, I don t think this corruption is limited to UTU. I have a firm belief it goes way beyond that, into all rail labor. And the genesis of it is at the very lowest level. And trying to control the internal politics of the organization becomes extremely difficult when you have all these forces coming from below up. They’re the ones that control the votes. They’re the ones that control a lot of the policies of the organization.
THE COURT: So, you’re saying the DLCs control the 1oca1 union officials?
THE DEFENDANT: Absolutely, absolutely. They’re more pervasive there and more powerful there than they ever were at the international level, because they control the absolute base of the organization. And you can believe their support is either generated because the individual members think they’re wonderful lawyers or do a good job or for other reasons. And to some they’re very good lawyers and do a very good job.
There are many other reasons that they get their support. And I think the government needs to look into that. And one of the things that I was going to say, and it also answers your question, is I’ve committed to the government and Mr. Gallagher to do whatever I can, now and in the future, to help clean up that corruption and try to get that control away.
THE COURT: Yeah, I think this -- it's become apparent to me reading the information in this case that this situation is longstanding and systemic, and I’m not sure case-by-case
crimina1 prosecutions are the most effective way to root out the inherent incentive that exists under this regime. Has the government thought about some legislative solution?
MR. GALLAGHER: The government has, in fact, Your Honor, and we’re hopeful that we can address that issue, but Mr. Sussman and his folks would probably have a greater influence than the U. S. Attorney’s office in trying to get audiences with those folks. In fact, one DLC, an honest DLC, is the son of a U.S. Senator. So, certainly there are ways to provide influence to change this system , but as Mr. Boyd mentioned, it goes back - - it actua11y goes back to the turn of the Nineteenth Century when the FELA came into existence in 1906, which created this limitless amount of money that could be awarded to damages. So, it ' s very lucrative for lawyers to get that FELA work and in competition, there are so many lawyers that want it, they are wiling to pad the pockets of union officers or help their campaigns in order to get or retain that designation.
10:11:49 AM
Google It!
|
|
|
Saturday, July 24, 2004 |
Robert D. Webb
9633 Amestoy Avenue
Northridge, CA 91325-1917
Appeal/correspondence
July 22, 2004 Certified Priority Mail # 7002 0510 0000 5406 3982
Mr. Paul C. Thompson, International President
United Transportation Union
14600 Detroit Avenue
Cleveland, OHIO 44107-4250
Re: Appeal to President Paul C. Thompson’s June 28 Membership Ratification Letter, Enclosed.
Dear Sir and Brother:
This is an appeal to your June 28 members’ ratification letter to J. Kevin Klein and John Previsich, encl. I am also responding to your July 16, 2004-letter attempting to state that General Chairmen J. Kevin Klein and John Previsich did not request International assistance resulting in the June 2004, Union Pacific Western Lines proposed modification agreement. According to Klein, Previsich and Vice GC Holder at Local 240s June 9, 2004, meeting in Rosemead, the June 23, 2004 General Committee meeting in Reno, and at both Local 1846 and Local 240s special meetings on July 8, 2004, one or more of these General Chairmen stated that an impasse was reached when the Union Pacific refused to negotiate with the General Committee regarding manager borrow outs used as engineers. They stated that the General Chairmen requested International assistance, which resulted in a lawsuit being filed by the UTU. The UP choose to negotiate a proposed agreement with the assistance of the International officers assigned by you, Assistant President Rick Marceau and Vice President David Hakey. Myself and up to 50 other members attended all four of the above meetings where the statements regarding a request for International assistance were witnessed. The proposal was overwhelmingly rejected by Local Chairmen at the UTU region meeting in Reno, which became apparent to GC J. Kevin Klein prior to and during the June 23, 2004, General Committee session. Not one Local Chairman attending was for the proposal and a subsequent opposition petition (vote in writing that you have) was signed by 21 out of 35 Local Chairmen.
The above paragraph is a direct parallel of Article 85, paragraph three, lines 9-17. You seem to have taken a position that the General Chairmen affected did not request International assistance, even though it is the General Chairmen who make and maintain agreements and that the above officers have stated over and again that they did in fact request International assistance to arrive at the current proposal. Attempting to bypass the majority vote of Local Chairmen affected is a violation of the contract with the members that our constitution represents. The following serious objections voiced by that majority of Local Chairmen have not been addressed; Article I “give back” of overtime to the UP after no more than 10 hours/20 mph schedule for pre-‘85 members, Article IV, first “attempt” to notify during displacement and the opening of off assignment payments (side letter 4). Clearly the BLE agreement reached in April 2004 does not forfeit overtime and has been suggested by all of the opposing Local Chairmen to be superior to the “give back” contained in the UTU proposal. This issue is foremost, yet remains uncorrected.
Thank you for reminding me that once the Local Chairmen vote to approve either system or local adjustments where International assistance was sought and obtained, as the above statements and signatures to the proposal Marceau and Hakey represent, then there is no requirement to a referendum vote the members. So, the ballots were mailed in violation of the constitution and now they must be stayed. The proposal must be withdrawn until the objections have been corrected to the approval of the majority of Local Chairmen affected. That will correctly conclude the matter under Article 85, line 15-17.
The undesirable modification proposal and International constitutional maneuvering is arousing the rage of a large number of pre and post-‘85 members. Not only the wage loss, but the fact that those overtime miles would no longer be counted toward the 4000-mile regulation, so members would have to work more and the pools would be cut. Whom does all of that benefit? Whose interests does the UTU represent? A recent quote by Michael Moore seems appropriate; “When motivated by rage, might I point out that when you feel betrayed, when you feel that something or someone you love has been wounded and cheated and lied to, the fury that floods the heart is unstoppable. Fury is a right of passage” . . . especially when dealing with robber baron railroads. That fury, or “fire in the belly,” gave those that came before us the courage to form a union and stand up against abuse more than 100 years ago. Improvements in pay and working conditions were obtained, sometimes by blood, that some in our union are attempting to take away today. Sir, both young and old feel betrayed. How could you possibly support this wage loss to your members, millions of dollars that will remain in the pockets of the Union Pacific? Does this in any way demonstrate integrity to the new member of today's “open policy” UTU? Is this what they have to look forward to with the coming engineer-only demand by the NCCC?
If the best we can do is to take away almost $60 a day from those that have paid their dues to this organization for 20, 30 or 40 years, then who could fault members for refusing to cowardly send dues to the UTU? Options are being considered by many, Mr. Thompson. Have we not lost enough already? Please sir and brother, I ask you to stay the ballots, withdraw the proposal and correct the objectionable items to the approval of the affected Local Chairmen, as the constitution requires.
Fraternally,
Robert D. Webb, VP/Local 240
Los Angeles
cc: D. E. Johnson, General Secretary & Treasurer
J. K. Klein, General Chairperson, GO-887
J. Previsich, General Chairperson
H. J. Garvin, Local Chairperson
Email: Above and officers/members of three hubs affected.
Enclosure: June 28, 2004, Thompson letter to Klein/Previsich.
12:02:57 AM
Google It!
|
|
|
Tuesday, July 13, 2004 |
UTU is at it again
CLEVELAND, July 9 -- The United Transportation Union is at it again, seeking another backdoor attempt to raid membership of the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen.
Right now, the UTU is looking for someone to sponsor legislation in the U.S. House of Representatives that would force the BLET into an all-out war on the nation’s railroads.
The proposed bill would allow the National Mediation Board to conduct an election of all locomotive engineers, conductors and trainmen who work for Class 1 railroads. Based on this election, the NMB would certify a single union to represent all the workers.
According to the proposed legislation, the single surviving union would be the union with the most members at the time the election. Currently, the UTU has slightly more members than the BLET.
The bill does not have a sponsor and has not been assigned a bill number. However, BLET lobbyists in Washington, D.C. are still working to make sure it stays that way.
This backdoor attempt is similar to the “Bosnian Amendment” the UTU attempted to pass in 1997 and the single operating craft idea first introduced in 1998.
“The UTU is at it again,” said BLET National President Don Hahs, “trying to take by force what it cannot have any other way. When given the opportunity to voluntarily merge with the UTU in 2001, our membership overwhelmingly voted no. Apparently, some people just can’t take ‘no’ for an answer.”
A copy of the UTU proposal is at:
http://www.ble-t.org/pr/pdf/hrnmb.pdf
1:21:57 AM
Google It!
|
|
July 11, 2004
Mr. Dan E. Johnson
General Secretary and Treasurer
United Transportation Union
14600 Detroit Avenue
Cleveland, OH 44107-4250
Article 74 Charges against General Chairman J. Kevin Klein UTU GO-887
Dear Sir and Brother:
The purpose of this letter is to prefer charges against General Chairman J. Kevin Klein of UTU General Committee GO-887. This member states that he is in deliberate and willful violation of the United Transportation Union's 2003 Constitution, via abuse of office due to failure to fulfill the obligations and responsibilities imposed upon him by that Constitution and the General Committee he serves. I specifically charge that he is in direct violation of Article 85, lines 15-17 of said UTU 2003 Constitution, and continues to be, even after acknowledging receipt of formal written protest from an overwhelming majority of the General Committee.
To briefly review: Earlier this year, the UTU filed a lawsuit against the Union Pacific Railroad for violations of the 1985 agreement. This was a result of the carriers refusal to negotiate with the Western Lines General Committee, as affected by manager borrow-outs used in place of engineers. The Union Pacific desired to eliminate the lawsuit and began negotiations. International officers Assistant President Rick Marceau and Vice President David Hakey were assigned by President Thompson and are signatures to proposed adjustments to the UP Western Lines HUB agreements in return for withdrawal of the lawsuit.
The first version of which Local 240 received was called UP Western Lines-Los Angeles HUB modification proposal. Early in June 2004, Local Chairmen were served with three versions in the different HUBs as local agreements, because each HUB has items specific and exclusive only to that HUB such as Flat Rates to Yermo, Crest Conductors, etc. The proposed adjustments were made to the Union Pacific Western Lines HUB agreements which were originally to be voted HUB by HUB under local ratification procedures lines 38-40 of Article 85 ratification procedures. The proposal was receiving almost unanimous opposition by Local Chairmen, which became more and more apparent during the 3 day Reno region meeting I attended in late June of 2004. By day three of these meetings, it was clear that the proposal would fail Local Chairmen ratification by a wide margin. At the General Committee meeting that I also attended, we received a little surprise. We were informed that International President Thompson had determined due to ratification concerns received by him from members, the proposal was no longer a local agreement but was now to be considered a system agreement, subject to member ratification (Thompson letter enclosed), how interesting.
The General Committee objected loudly to the items in the proposals themselves, be they called local or system. The primary objection was a "giveback to the carrier" provision to eliminate overtime after no more than 10 hours for pre-85 members. They also objected to forced assignments to auxiliary extra boards and other items. The General Committee drafted a written petition of opposition of July 6, 2004, (enclosed) listing the above items and instructing GC Klein to withdraw from the proposal until those issues were resolved. GC Klein acknowledged receipt of this petition at Local 240s special July 8, 2004, union meeting in front of 30 members in Rosemead, CA of which I was in attendance. GC Klein also acknowledged the General Committee objections and overwhelming membership opposition to the proposal, but changed only the forced assignment item and then mailed out a new "system" agreement without voting the General Committee. We appealed the President's decision does not permit GC Klein to ignore voting procedure in lines 15-17 of Article 85, but have received no action as of this date by the President.
The new, proposed UP Western Lines System Modification Agreement contains no change to the overtime elimination "giveback" that was objected to by petition in the first proposal(s). This overtime "giveback" clause was suggested by many to be the main reason for failure of acceptance of the proposals during three consecutive meetings at Reno, Colton and Rosemead because the recent BLE modification agreement has no "giveback" provision for pre-'85, while providing overtime after 12 hours to post-'85 up until July 1, 2004, which is a net gain imposing no negative impact on those in service now. This, they all said would be more desirable. However, GC Klein sited his desire to eliminate the July 1, 2004, cutoff date instead. This required "giveback" of overtime after 10 hours to the UP, regardless of wage loss the proposal will suffer members. Note: This 20 mph schedule, overtime after no more than 10 hour provision was obtained by trading crew consist and other monetary considerations away in recent, previous UP-SP merger agreements.
GC Klein did not change several provisions required by the General Committee's petition, did not vote the Committee on the new proposal at all, but instead by-passed approval from the General Committee prior to membership ratification by mailing out the new unapproved approved system proposal to the membership. He continues to ignore the numerous concerns of protest and has begun a traveling "town hall" promotional campaign requiring special meetings. He has stated that he plans to mail the ballots in a few days regardless of all opposition incurred. In other words, GC Klein is disallowing the Constitutional rights afforded in Article 85, lines 15-17, ..."Any system or local adjustments agreed to by the International President or his/her representatives, shall be subject to a majority vote of local chairpersons affected; which I charge he is in full violation of.
The UTU President did not instruct GC Klein to directly violate the UTU Constitution by omission of lines 15-17, under Article 85 in his June 28 letter. President Thompson's decision to change the agreement proposal from local to system and submit the adjustments to modify the UP Western Lines Agreement to the entire membership does not in any way permit the General Chairman to violate any provision of the UTU Constitution. GC Klein must therefore be prohibited from by-passing the only step that will insure General Committee input and approval prior to balloting the members. He must be ordered to withdraw the proposal and cease and desist in mailing ballots of same until such time he is turned around and votes the Committee first or a trial board makes a decision. Constitutional rights of the Committee must not stand in violation. Ratification could impost those objectionable items upon our members, which the Union Pacific will never give back. That's why there is an oversight provision to allow Committee input under International intervention. Therefore the right of the General Committee to approve any local or system adjustment agreed to by the International President or his/her representatives must not be ignored. This General Chairman is deliberately denying the members the rights granted by the delegates in UTU Conventions under our democratic process and is quickly attempting to impose an undesirable agreement upon those he serves. That is not quality representation, nor should it be UTU representation.
Myself and others have requested on July 6, 2004, that the International President uphold and enforce the constitution and stop this violation. So far we have not received his response. We have appealed President Thompson's letter under Article 75, part II to you Mr. Johnson, on July 8, 2004, as it is being abused by the General Chairman as an excuse not to poll the Committee under Article 85, lines 15-17. So far, we have not heard a response. We all have telephones, email and FAX including J. Kevin Klein, who has informed us that he will be mailing the ballots regardless of the above listed objections already made very clear to him. Nobody in the UTU can claim they didn't know, several of us are covering those bases. We will not be ignored, the International must not delay, integrity is in check here.
Someone has to properly object to this violation. I am not experienced at preferring charges against anyone, this is a first for me. Therefore I must request your assistance against any impropriety you may find that would delay the process. We have almost no time left. So, having received this charge letter, please Secretary Johnson, instruct GC Klein to cease and desist in the mailing of ballots immediately until the President responds or a trial board renders a decision. Time is of the essence, as you well know. If ratification without General Committee approval were to allow the Union Pacific to implement, the losses will be permanent. I trust that is not the intent of the International. But, delayed and faulty union procedures will not resend an agreement once in the carrier's hands, and we the petitioner's and helpers know the International is very much aware of that fact. This is a test of the "new open" policy of the UTU. We must see immediate assertive action. We will not let $60 a day in lost wages go. This urgent charge letter is sent certified mail, overnight delivery for that reason, so you would respond in time. Should the President act in time to instruct GC Klein to abide by the UTU Constitution and withdraw the proposal until it meets General Committee approval, then I will gladly resend this charge letter as soon as the General Chairmen is brought into compliance.
Fraternally,
Robert D. Webb VP/ Local 240
Los Angeles
9633 Amestoy Avenue
Northridge, CA 91325-1917
FAX and home 818-993-5736, cell 213-280-7537
cc: Paul C. Thompson, President
R. L. Marceau, Assistant President
D. L. Hakey, Vice President
J. Kevin Klein, GC UTU GO-887
L. W. Partridge, Secretary, GO-887
12:50:18 AM
Google It!
|
|
|
Sunday, July 11, 2004 |
|
In Deaths at Rail Crossings, Missing Evidence and Silence
By WALT BOGDANICH
|
Jenny Nordberg contributed reporting for this article. Tom Torok contributed data analysis and reporting. Eric Koli contributed reporting from San Francisco.
At 5:45 p.m., with the autumn sun dipping toward the horizon, Blas Lopez, a father of four young children, drove his truck loaded with potatoes bound for market onto a railroad crossing in south-central Washington State. In an instant, a 4,700-ton Union Pacific train rammed Mr. Lopez's truck with the force of an explosion, ripping apart his body.
Union Pacific responded as most railroads do after fatal crossing accidents: It blamed the victim, Mr. Lopez, not itself.
What Union Pacific did not say was that the warning signal at the crossing contained parts that the manufacturer had said, 12 years earlier, should be replaced "as soon as possible" because they might be defective. After a witness to the accident said the signal appeared to have malfunctioned, a lawyer for Mr. Lopez's family arranged with Union Pacific in October 2001 to inspect the signal.
But a railroad manager beat the lawyer there by several hours. In the predawn darkness, the manager secretly swapped the suspect parts for newer ones. The cover-up was not discovered until weeks later, when the Lopezes' lawyer noticed that the serial numbers on the parts did not match the railroad's records.
Union Pacific's conduct is a stark example of how some railroads, even as they blame motorists, repeatedly sidestep their own responsibility in grade-crossing fatalities. Their actions range from destroying, mishandling or simply losing evidence to not reporting the crashes properly in the first place, a seven-month investigation by The New York Times has found.
Union Pacific stands out. In one recent 18-month period, seven federal and state courts imposed sanctions on Union Pacific, the nation's biggest railroad, for destroying or failing to preserve evidence in crossing accidents, and an eighth court ordered a case retried. One sanction has since been overturned on appeal.
Over the last eight years, railroads have also broken federal rules by failing to promptly report hundreds of fatal accidents, 71 of them last year, denying the federal authorities the chance to investigate when evidence is fresh and still available, according to a computer analysis of federal data by The Times. Enforcement of these rules is so lax that federal officials said they were not even aware of the reporting problems.
In fact, one Union Pacific official said that federal regulators told the railroad in late 1999 "to stop calling" after fatal accidents. Federal officials denied doing so, but the following year, The Times's analysis shows the number of accidents not reported promptly by Union Pacific quadrupled.
Trains, like airplanes, have black-box event recorders, but records show that railroads have a spotty history of keeping them in working order and have sometimes lost or erased their information after crashes. The information from recorders can be so inconclusive that after one 17-year-old girl was killed in Tennessee, the railroad produced five different versions of the accident from the same black box.
On average, one person a day dies at a crossing in the United States. Since 2000, more than twice as many people have been killed at grade crossings as have died in commercial plane crashes. But these deaths draw little national attention because they usually come one or two at a time, often where tracks slice through small towns and rural expanses across the country.
"It's a systemic failure," said James E. Hall, a former chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board. "It's been something that has just not grabbed the attention, unfortunately, of the public."
It has barely grabbed the attention of the government. Only federal authorities, not the local police, have the authority to properly investigate a railroad's role in an accident. But of the nearly 3,000 rail crossing accidents last year, federal authorities fully investigated just four.
Families of victims searching for the cause of a crash have to ask the railroads themselves or file lawsuits. But as judges who have sanctioned Union Pacific have found, getting a straight answer can be difficult.
Continued at
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/11/national/11RAILS.html?hp=&;pagewanted=all&position=
11:29:51 AM
Google It!
|
|
In reading the following, notice how Boyd, the Judge, and the US Attorney are suggesting that the FELA law is the cause of this whole scandal. As many have suggested, the attempt to spin this case of personal corruption and greed into an attack on FELA is on. Don't let them do it.
July 9, 2004, 11:14PM
By HARVEY RICE
Copyright 2004 Houston Chronicle
Disgraced former leaders of the nation's largest railroad operating union described a system controlled by corrupt lawyers during a sentencing hearing Friday in a Houston federal court.
Two ex-presidents of the United Transportation Union were sentenced to two years in prison for accepting bribes from lawyers in exchange for access to workers injured on the job.
Two other union officials were sentenced to three years' probation after all four pleaded guilty to a charge of conspiracy. Other counts in the September 2003 indictment were dropped in exchange for their cooperation in an ongoing investigation.
U.S. District Judge Sim Lake also ordered former international presidents Charles Leonard Little, 69, of Leander, and Byron Alfred Boyd Jr., 57, of Seattle to pay a $10,000 fine and a $100,000 forfeiture.
Boyd, who resigned his post after his indictment, described a union system controlled by lawyers who paid as much as $30,000 to be on a list giving them access to injured union members.
"The system has gone on for generations, and the system goes on as we stand here today," Boyd said.
Lake sentenced Ralph John Dennis, 51, of Boone, Iowa, former union director of insurance, and John Russell Rookard, 57, of Olalla, Wash., Boyd's assistant, to three years' probation and a $45,000 forfeiture. He fined Dennis $2,000.
Lake said there appears to be a problem with the system that criminal prosecution could not cure.
Lake asked Assistant U.S. Attorney Edward Gallagher whether his office had sought help from legislators in changing the law.
Gallagher, saying lawmakers had been consulted, said the corruption went back to the 1908 passage of the Federal Employers Liability Act, allowing unlimited damages for injured railroad workers because their jobs are so hazardous.
He told Lake that so many lawyers wanted to represent those workers that they were willing to bribe union officials.
Gallagher was referring to lawyers designated by the UTU president as legal counsel with honorary union membership. Although any lawyer can represent an injured union member, those on the designated counsel list had the union's imprimatur and easier access.
The probe began in 1999 after El Paso lawyer Victor Biegnowski was accused of insurance fraud.
Biegnowski, a UTU designated counsel, offered information to prosecutors about the bribery.
Lawyers involved in the scheme were given immunity for their cooperation in prosecuting the four union members.
"Had it been reversed, it might have been 35 lawyers before us today," Gallagher told Lake.
But Little's attorney, David Gerger, contended that "the people who benefited financially the most have never been prosecuted and never will be prosecuted."
Gerger said some lawyers involved in the scam are still designated counsels with the union. Gallagher responded that the government is pursuing noncriminal action against them, including disbarment.
Of the 56 designated counsels at the time the union officials were indicted in September 2003, six were in Texas and five in the Houston area.
UTU spokesman Frank Wilner said the union has made reforms and is working with prosecutors.
"We are concerned about corruption and doing everything we can to root it out so that such an embarrassing and tragic situation never recurs," Wilner said.
12:21:34 AM
Google It!
|
|
|
Friday, July 09, 2004 |
July 09, 2004
John Yembrick
Public Affairs Specialist
P. O. Box 61129 Houston, TX 77208
Phone: 713/567-9388 Fax: 713/718-3389
E-Mail: usatty.txs@usdoj.gov
FOUR FORMER UTU OFFICIALS SENTENCED FOR LABOR RACKETEERING
CONTACT AUSA: Edward F. Gallagher
PHONE: (713) 567-9343
(HOUSTON, TX) United States Attorney Michael Shelby announced that Byron Boyd , 57, of Seattle, Washington, and Charles A. Little , 66, Leander, Texas, both former international presidents of the United Transportation Union (UTU), were each sentenced to prison terms today, and ordered to forfeit to the United States a total of $200,000 in racketeering activity proceeds. At a hearing held this afternoon, United States District Judge Sim Lake sentenced Boyd and Little to each serve a 2 year term of imprisonment, without parole, and ordered each to forfeit to the United States $100,000 in racketeering proceeds. Both men were also fined $10,000 each. Judge Lake further ordered that each man is to be supervised for a period of three years following his release from prison.
9:28:05 PM
Google It!
|
|
|
Sunday, July 04, 2004 |
'God of machines is to blame'
02/07/2004 11:51 - (SA) [July 2, 2004]
Articles
Indian train disaster kills 20
India train derails, 20 dead
New Delhi - India's railways minister has absolved himself of blame for accidents plaguing the world's largest train network, saying the fate of its 13 million daily passengers rested with the Hindu god of machines, Vishwakarma.
"Indian Railways is the responsibility of Lord Vishwakarma," Laloo Prasad Yadav said, as quoted on Friday by The Times of India newspaper.
"So is the safety of passengers. It is his duty (to ensure safety), not mine. I have been forced to don his mantle," the mercurial minister said on a visit to his hometown of Patna in eastern India.
Yadav's statement came less than a month after 20 people were killed and around 100 injured when a passenger train plunged off a bridge in western India after hitting a boulder.
India's railway system, which stretches 108700 km across the nation of more than a billion people, sees accidents large or small nearly every day owing in part to badly outdated infrastructure.
The rail system is saddled by a 1.6 million-strong workforce, making it the world's largest single non-military employer.
Industry analysts criticise the government for introducing new trains every year without investing in the system's upkeep. Raising railway fares is a major political liability in India.
Yadav, a veteran low-caste activist, is known for his outlandish statements but enjoys wide support among Bihar's peasants and is a top coalition partner of the left-leaning government which took office May 22.
He recently began signing letters as Lalu Prasad, dropping his surname, reportedly after consultation with astrologers.
Edited by Anthea Jonathan
11:50:14 PM
Google It!
|
|
© Copyright 2005 The Usual Suspect.
Last update: 5/25/2005; 4:38:20 PM.
|
|
|
