Letters to the Editor
Democracy Lost At Local 372

To the Editor:

I have been following the situation with my friend and very strong advocate for union democracy at District Council 37 Local 372, Tony Ferina, and I must say the behavior of President Veronica Montgomery-Costa and her election committee, which has been in place for the past six years, does not surprise me one bit. Something has to be done to open members' eyes to the truth about this administration and how the actions of this Local 372 president and District Council 37 president are not helpful or healthy to the level of unionism needed to take place over the course of the next 20 to 30 years.

On Dec. 13 Local 372 held a general membership meeting in the union headquarters building, where all business of the local must take place. During the meeting, Ms. Costa ignored members who were left standing at the microphone not recognized.

One of the most significant aspects of the meeting was the report of the election committee on the disqualification of Tony Ferina from running as chapter chair for the School Aides chapter. Ms. Leacock was allowed to read her report of the nominations/elections and what took place during the meeting, and she was allowed to share how the committee came to the decision to disqualify Mr. Ferina. She was also able to give the timeline as to how the committee came to the decision and the circumstances surrounding the disqualification of Mr. Ferina.

After her report, Ms. Costa opened the floor for questions and discussion about the report. Mr. Ferina approached and was recognized and did his best to explain why he thought he should be included on the ballot. While he shared, there were comments from members which were rude and inconsiderate. Their only concern was how long he had been speaking and how they weren't in agreement with what he was stating. Ms. Costa decided in the interest of being fair that Mr. Ferina should receive additional time to express his concerns about the decision. To no avail, he shared how he was a member in good standing and the fact that Ms. Boyd was at the meeting as a member in good standing but he wasn't aware she hadn't completed a green application card assuring her membership. She had been designated as a fee-payer, not a member in good standing.

I asked Mr. Ferina to give me the opportunity to address the membership and he allowed me to step to the microphone as I was standing behind him awaiting my turn to ask questions and make my point. I must say before I spoke both the lawyer and Ms. Costa, especially the lawyer, stressed points according to Ms. Boyd's status and her being a fee-payer and not a member in good standing.

It was incredible to listen to this lawyer manipulate the conversation when he wasn't a member. Since the meeting had moved to the discussion and question phase, according to the rules governing such a report and the ''Rules of Order,'' the lawyer shouldn't have been able to share anything, but he quoted the constitution of the local and AFSCME and the eligibility of the member (Ms. Boyd), who wasn't present for the meeting. The demeanor and aggressive attempt of the lawyer to manipulate the meeting and its members were apparent.

I approached the microphone to speak and was called names. My first concern was the procedures in place to make sure a member in good standing can be nominated without being disqualified: how does a chapter chair confirm the level of the person's membership during a meeting where nominations/elections of officers will be conducted?

My next point was, since Mr. Ferina was present and Ms. Leacock reported in her report that he indeed accepted the nomination, does this acceptance for the record not supersede him being nominated by a fee-payer? And is there anything in AFSCME's constitution which says him accepting the nomination and completing the proper form disqualifies him from being included on the ballot?

The lawyer approached the microphone and again started to talk about Ms. Boyd and her status during the nomination. I was furious as a result of his opening statement. I was asked to calm down by security and was called out of order because the lawyer who should have not been presenting was ignoring my questions. At one point a union representative approached me and told me I needed to be quiet and calm down. I said to her the security person can ask me to do that but not you; you work for me.

To further exacerbate the situation, several other things happened during the meeting which were deceptive and untrue on behalf of Ms. Costa.

She stated there are haters who refuse to see she is doing a good job and the best job for members. She talked about the attacks from within the local and DC 37 members who have other political agendas and how they are trying to move further up in the union and DC 37. She stated she knows who they are and is prepared to go at it with anyone who brings it.

She stated that there are individuals who are spreading lies about her pay. The literature quoted her pay as $350,000. She said it was a lie but did not state what her compensation package looks like. While she spoke, all I could think about was where the truth really was in what she was saying. We the members do not know her pay or compensation package because it has not been approved by the members. As a matter of fact, there has been no authorization of a budget of spending in our local, since her administration.

She stated once again why the local can't do mail ballots and how AFSCME does not recognize it. I pointed out how the Judicial Panel Chair of AFSCME, in a decision on my protest of the election of 2005, expressed his concern about the low voter turnout of the membership in officer elections, and he recommended either longer hours to vote or a mail ballot. While I had the microphone I pointed out how she has extended the hours of members voting in one place from 4 to 8 p.m. to the new hours of noon to 9 p.m. I stated the new hours were a farce because many members would be on the job during those hours and would not have the opportunity to vote with their busy work schedule. I stated I was still concerned about union democracy in Local 372 when members don't have the opportunity to vote.

Mr. Ferina pointed out the retirees increased their return on officer elections by more than 60 percent using mail ballots, and he also wanted to know when the results of the election would be publicized.

This Local 372 President has not changed her behavior from the old administration of Charlie Hughes. She still hinders the ability of members to vote in an election, she still keeps the financial records a secret by allowing a member to see prepared records which can't leave the room but will be thrown in the garbage once the door is closed. She still likes to disrespect and destroy any member who believes she isn't doing right by the membership.

There must be a change in leadership in Local 372. Our local is not transparent and it is run from the top down. Both Ms. Costa and the members who attended the meeting refuse to recognize the union and its direction is bigger and greater than the 200 members who participate in the meetings at union headquarters. There must be a concerted effort to bring our local union to the level of unionism and democracy that only real concern and leadership which respects members can provide.

Many people see what is going on in our local and how this current president and administration is treating us, and I guarantee you it is affecting how we are looked upon and treated on the job and in the schools; even in this city. You cannot kill democracy in a local union without there being some serious consequences to unionism in a city such as New York. It is embarrassing.

In conclusion, members must see this administration for what it is: a residue of the previous corrupt administration which took any given moment to do what they wanted, when they wanted.

LARRY LUTHER DAVIS, Local 372 member

Editor's note: Mr. Davis ran for president of Local 372 in its past two elections and is expected to challenge Ms. Costa again in 2008.