Local 100's Dubious Win

In a process that could be described as comically slow except that its implications are so serious, Transport Workers Union Local 100 took a full week to complete a vote-tallying process on several bylaw changes that seem primarily designed to increase the power of Local 100 President Roger Toussaint.

The slip-shod handling of the election was evident from both the unwarranted delays in the actual counting of the ballots and the paltry return by less than 15 percent of the union's members. When a union whose mail ballots on other matters routinely produce returns above 60 percent gets that small a response, it is a striking commentary on the extent to which Mr. Toussaint has alienated much of his rank and file.

It is believed that his loss of support - which became evident when he garnered only 45 percent of the vote in his last re-election run but gained a third term because his four opponents split the rest of the ballots - is behind one of the key bylaw changes: the moving up of the next Local 100 election by six months, to June of next year. What gives this change an "Alice in Wonderland" quality is that the ballots won't be counted until that December.

That delay has roused suspicion among some of his political opponents about possible ballot-tampering during the intervening time. It seems more plausible, however, that Mr. Toussaint is hoping the earlier voting deadline will enable him to invalidate the votes of many members who oppose his regime.

The union's bylaws require that members be in good standing and current with their dues for at least 12 months in order to vote. At last report, less than half of the rank and file meets that standard, with many refraining from paying dues as a misguided protest against Mr. Toussaint's leadership.

A report from Local 100 on last week's vote takes an extended shot at this newspaper, suggesting we opposed the bylaw changes as part of a continued campaign against Mr. Toussaint that began with the transit strike and was undertaken on behalf of "the powers that be."

Since we defended Mr. Toussaint while he was under an avalanche of tabloid editorial criticism during and after that strike, this claim should be seen for the absurdity that it is. We haven't changed since then; what has changed is Mr. Toussaint, from a union leader who was a vigorous champion of members' rights into someone who has subverted those rights and union democracy in a series of increasingly desperate and irrational attempts to preserve his power.