Print
Email Story
RICHLAND -- A federal judge has begun sorting out the apparent bad blood between the United Steelworkers local and related labor organizations in a double trial.
At the heart of the two cases being heard are claims of discrimination and what the United Steelworkers International describes in court documents as "an extraordinary and damaging internal grudge match at Local 12-369." That union represents about 1,280 Hanford steelworkers and others.
Stephanie Green, president of the local, sued the United Steelworkers International under three civil rights laws and two labor laws, contending it discriminated against her because she is black and a woman.
The Hanford Atomic Metals Trades Council, an umbrella labor organization of 15 local unions whose members work at Hanford, also is named.
In a second case being heard at the same time, the local and its financial secretary, David Roberts, is suing United Steelworkers International claiming that a wide range of its actions violated the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act and harmed them.
The international is responsible for the discrimination and retaliation suffered by plaintiffs because it had knowledge of the problem, but failed to act, effectively ratifying the harassment, according to court documents.
The plaintiffs in the cases are asking for unspecified damages, including punitive damages, and that the international be barred from setting up an administratorship that would allow it to take over the local and suspend the current leadership.
Senior Judge Robert Whaley has set aside up to three weeks in Eastern Washington Federal District Court in Richland to hear the case, which began last week. It is a nonjury trial.
Fighting within the local started long before Green was elected president and Roberts was elected financial secretary in November 2005, according to court documents.
The former administration initially refused to install the newly elected officers, claiming that the election process had not followed the local's bylaws and constitution. A commission formed by the international found no problem with the election and ordered the newly elected executive board installed.
"This commenced an internecine battle," wrote the international in court documents filed early in the case. "A majority of the executive board opposes Green and Roberts and has constantly tried to undermine their work. Green and Roberts, for their part, are sometimes able to have the decisions of the executive board reversed at membership meetings, following which the executive board thinks of new ways to attack them."
In December 2006, nine members filed charges against the two, but a hearing exonerated them. However, the international said it still had concerns about whether members had been improperly removed from the local and its committees and whether potential legal and financial liabilities had been incurred related to employee dismissals.
The paid employees of the local "are often pawns in the officers' battles and some have been fired, laid off or otherwise burdened with all of this," the international said in court documents.
The plaintiffs believe that the international and HAMTC have sided with local officers who oppose Green and Roberts or have not done enough to protect the two officers and the local from internal attacks, they indicate in court documents.
"The international has engaged in repeated acts which have prohibited the local, Green and Roberts from fulfilling their legal obligations and duties," said plaintiffs in court documents.
The thrust of many of Green's complaints was that the international should have done more to silence her opponents and force HAMTC to agree with her, said the international in court documents. At the same time, Green's opponents criticized the international for not taking measures against her.
"Both camps seriously misunderstood the international's authority," according to court documents.
The international did impose an administratorship on the local for 16 days, and the two sides disagree on whether only Green and Roberts were suspended or all leadership was suspended.
Whaley earlier ordered the administratorship dissolved because he found no emergency to trigger procedures as outlined by the international's constitution.
However, some international leadership remained convinced that an administratorship was necessary because of issues at one time such as a backlog of more than 200 member grievances against employers that had been pending for months, said court documents.
Other issues in the case include whether Green was improperly denied signature authority as president and was kept from interacting with the local's Spokane branch. Roberts testified in court that when Green and he went to Spokane to introduce themselves to leadership at a training session, an international employee said they didn't need to attend. They were met "with great reluctance," Roberts said.
Green alleges in court documents that the Spokane Medco unit later was improperly removed from the local, causing a significant loss of monthly income to the local.
The local pays monthly fees of about $45,000 to the international, but despite that the international has failed to perform its duties, plaintiffs said in court documents.
"Ms. Green's claim that the international's employees -- from top to bottom -- engaged in a conspiracy to 'get' her because of her race and sex is not only untrue, but flies in the face of what the international stands for," the international wrote in court documents.
HAMTC also said in court documents that Green's allegations that HAMTC engaged in a conspiracy with the international to undermine her as union president, either because of her race and gender or what she said, are untrue.
-- Annette Cary: 582-1533; acary@tricityherald.com; more Hanford news at hanfordnews.com.
