ATU757 President Hunt nonfeasance or misfeasance?

On February 2^nd, 2011 President Hunt sent a letter (click here to see the letter) to six (6) members. This letter was in regards to my submission of “preferring of charges” filed January 21^st, 2011. President Hunt did not want me to take that type of action. He requested that I continue to work with him on trying to solve this using other means. He also wanted to keep it private between the other member and me. Due to the union and TriMet’s past failures to resolve this issue, I felt that this has become my last option.

As you can see from the letter, President Hunt denied my union constitutional rights claiming it was infringing on members’ freedom of speech. He continued to state that it is not related to the union and charges are not appropriate for consideration by the membership. He then referred these six (6) members to address this with TriMet.

When I was collecting signatures for the filing I made a mistake and collected some from members inside Center Street “Bull Pen”. The member that this filing was about witnessed these actions and felt intimidated by my actions. As per constitution, President Hunt emailed a copy of my filing to the member that was being charged. He included the entire list of all members who signed the filing. The member being filed against felt I had created an intimidating work environment and President Hunt’s letter indicated this is a TriMet issue. The member released all the documents including the signature list of fourteen (14) members to TriMet HR. HR then questioned members on the list about when they signed it, where they signed it, if they were on the clock and if they read the entire filing before signing it.

Listed below are questions I am posting about Presidents Hunt’s actions:

1.       I was the sole member filing charges against the other member. Because our constitution requires a minimum of five (5) signatures for the filing, President Hunt states that the first five (5) members that sign are the ones actually filing the charges. Fourteen (14) members signed this filing and fourteen (14) member’s names were forwarded to the member being charged. How come fourteen (14) members did not receive this letter?

2.       The letter states “a union may not discipline a member for libelous or untrue speech, because such discipline would curtail the free speech expression of union members. By the same token, all members must be accorded equal rights and privileges.” It also states “Since this is essentially a claim of workplace-related harassment.” So looking at these two (2) statements President Hunt is saying harassment is a freedom of speech?

3.       In a meeting with President Hunt about this letter, he stated that the dismissal of this issue was because he felt it would be too taxing on the membership’s resources. Is it not important to give the membership an opportunity to hear the issue and vote on how our resources are used?

4.       Many times in charter meetings I have heard union officers state that it is important to bring issues to the union first rather than going directly to the employer. This gives the members a chance to solve an issue without the employer being involved. So do we go to the union first or do we go to the employer?

5.       In that meeting with President Hunt about this letter, he retracted many of the statements made in the letter. This was only done verbally between the two (2) of us and there were no witnesses to our communications. No formal retractions of the letter were ever sent out. If there were no witnesses or no formal retraction letter does this letter still stand as typed?

6.       In that meeting and an email reply from President Hunt, he confirms sending the member being charged a copy of the charges including the signatures. I asked Khris Alexander if he received a copy of the members who signed a filing against him. Khris tells me that he did not receive any signature information. We have two (2) preferring of charges and each was handled differently, why?

7.       Is it not the duty of the officers and executive board to insure that the funds and property of the L.U. are preserved? (our constitution 13.15 page 58)

8.       Does it not state in our constitution that “No officer or member of the L.U. shall furnish to any unauthorized person a list of the names and addresses of the membership?” (our constitution 21.7 page 104)

President Hunt’s actions have exposed fifteen (15) members to possible harm from the employer and or each other. How will this weigh on member’s minds the next time they are asked to sign something for our union? I feel President Hunt’s actions above are perfidy.

Did President Hunt perform an act which might lawfully be done, in an improper manner, by which another person receives an injury (misfeasance) or did non-performance of some act which ought to be performed (nonfeasance)?