Wrong District's Meeting
Clear '372' Head Who Barred Rival

By MEREDITH KOLODNER

A judicial panel from District Council 37's international union has ruled that Local 372 President Veronica Montgomery-Costa did not violate the rights of her former challenger, Larry Davis, when she had him removed from a union meeting six months ago.

VERONICA MONTGOMERY-COSTA: Right to exclude upheld.

Mr. Davis charged that Ms. Montgomery-Costa and Executive Vice President Santos Crespo improperly ejected him from a District 24 union meeting in Queens last October. But the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees' Judicial Panel Chairman ruled that Mr. Davis had no right to attend the meeting because he works in District 5 in Harlem. Further, it said the policy preventing members from attending meetings in other districts does not infringe on their ability to be active and informed union members.

'Didn't Restrict Rights'

"[Mr. Davis's] right to be actively involved in union affairs," wrote Judicial Panel Chair John Seferian, "has not been restricted by the local's long-standing policy pertaining to district meetings."

Mr. Davis had asserted that blocking members from attending any meeting held by the union was tantamount to restricting their involvement in union activity. But Mr. Seferian ruled that members had sufficient ways to take part in union business.

LARRY DAVIS: An outside agitator?

"[Mr. Davis] has been and can continue to be actively engaged in the affairs of the union by participation in local and chapter meetings, and in his own district meeting," he wrote.

Mr. Davis tried to attend the District 24 meeting at the invitation of Tony Ferina, a shop steward and member of District 24. It was noted that there is no written union policy preventing members from attending meetings outside their own district, and it was not refuted that Mr. Davis had been allowed to attend other district meetings.

Used Words Against Him

But Mr. Seferian sided with Ms. Montgomery-Costa's assertion that it was a well-known policy dating back at least 30 years, and the panel chair used a line of Mr. Davis's own testimony to detail his ruling: "Ferina wanted me at the meeting, but I said to him, 'You know, I don't feel too comfortable in going to the district meeting in another district, because there are some rules that Local 372 has about members being at other meetings.'''

Mr. Davis said his point had been that different districts had different rules. "This is the first time this practice has been challenged," he said April 12 after receiving the ruling, "and if there's no written policy in place, I don't understand how he can rule in her favor. When it's challenged, somebody's got to make a decision whether it's fair."

Both Ms. Montgomery-Costa and Mr. Crespo declined to comment on the decision.

In suggesting a remedy, Mr. Seferian wrote that "Brother Davis has the ability to change the Local 372 policy with respect to attendance at district meetings by having a motion passed at a Local 372 membership meeting."

Mr. Davis said he was still considering whether to appeal the ruling.