The Long Count: Big Delay in Tally Before TWU Bylaws Change;
Will Move Up Election But Open Ballots 6 Months After; Just 15% Voted
By ARI PAUL

First the envelopes containing ballots needed to be alphabetized by name. Then they needed to be screened to see if the voters were union members in good standing. And then union officers delayed opening the ballots yet again, to make sure that the envelope-cutters were working properly.

ROGER TOUSSAINT: Can't hurry envelope-cutters.

Nearly 5,300 envelopes arrived July 7 at the Manhattan headquarters of Transport Workers Union Local 100 containing ballots on a set of new bylaws to alter election protocol, reorganize sections of the union and create a new executive office.

Advance Election, Not Tally

But various moves to organize the ballots and other delays let the week pass before ballots started to be tallied on Friday evening. With only a fraction of the membership voting, Local 100 members approved a set of new bylaw changes that would move next year's election from December to June and create a new executive position.

The passage of the set of changes is a tactical victory for Local 100 President Roger Toussaint, who argued that moving the election from December to June would save the union money, and that the new administrative vice president would help manage the local more efficiently. His opponents, many of whom are former allies, insisted that a number of the changes grant Mr. Toussaint increased power over the local.

JOHN SAMUELSEN: Delays rouse suspicion.

"These amendments are the outcome of seven years of discussion by the 48-member Executive Board and years of work by the union leadership to make the Local stronger, more effective, and more responsive to its members," Local 100 said in a statement.

The local also took issue with coverage of the vote in this newspaper, saying, "The vote result occurred despite blatant attempts by forces outside our union, most notably the newspaper called The Chief, to disrupt our organization and to paint years of hard work by our 48-member executive board as a sinister 'maneuver.' What we have stood up for and our 2005 strike represent a challenge to the labor movement and a threat to those in power. As a result, following the strike, The Chief took upon itself the job of tearing down Local 100 on behalf of the powers that be."

HERMAN BENSON: 'An unacceptable process.'

The Chief's editor, Richard Steier, called the accusation "ridiculous."

Complaints About Count

Critics of Mr. Toussaint, who rallied against the changes, complained that the vote count lacked oversight from the American Arbitrators Association. They also insisted that the delays in the vote count were unnecessary and alleged that they were meant to dissuade officers from observing the counting process.

The union justified the delay, saying that "Tallying the vote took a lot of labor power, at the same time that the Union had to conduct business as usual. As a result, the process took several days."

Local 100 Power Division Chairman Tony Utano observed the vote-count at the union hall last week. He noted that more than 22,000 ballots in the union's general election in 2006 were counted in less than 24 hours.

Suspicious of In-House Tally

While Local 100 had promised that an early election proposed among the bylaw changes would be overseen by the American Arbitration Association, the vote on the changes themselves was counted by union officials. Union officers such as Mr. Utano used vacation days to observe the ballot count last week, and critics of Mr. Toussaint alleged that the union had attempted to exhaust the observers' vacation time and then proceed to count the ballots after they were forced to return to their jobs.

John Samuelsen, a Track Inspector and likely candidate for Local 100 president next year, vowed to appeal the bylaw vote to the TWU International.

Herman Benson, the secretary-treasurer of the Brooklyn-based Association for Union Democracy, said that the situation with the vote count was worrisome because there has been confusion within the union since it lost dues check-off rights last June about who is in good standing and eligible to vote.

"In the context of the whole situation of the TWU, the system of running this referendum is not acceptable," he said. "Especially since there's such an embattled controversial situation in the TWU, this referendum should be run by an absolute impartial agency, which conducts the election from start to finish."

Mr. Benson added, "A mailed ballot is the easiest to run and the easiest to steal, and under these conditions you would want the most scrupulous supervision."

Decry Low Participation

Equally unnerving to some of the observers was the fact that in a vote that could dramatically alter the shape of the union, only 5,300 members out of 36,000 - less than 15 percent - voted.

Mr. Samuelsen believed members were not motivated to vote because Mr. Toussaint has taken elected officers off employer-paid release time and in 2006 presented workers with the same contract they had previously voted against by seven votes.

"The response by Local 100 members is, 'Why should I vote?''' Mr. Samuelsen said. "The members are disenfranchised. The greatest crime perpetrated against Local 100 members is convincing them their vote doesn't count."

Justification for Changes

The union argued in its newsletter to members that the bylaw changes were necessary to run the local, saying that an administrative vice president was need to oversee operations such as the Child Care Fund, which suffered from financial problems earlier this year.

"The aim is to always achieve the best combination of even-handedness, democracy and organizational strength," the union said of the proposed bylaw changes.

Eibry Nauden, a Station Agent at the Chambers St. station on the A/C line, voted against all of the proposals.

"I think it's a power grab by Toussaint," he said. "It gives him more control over replacing people. We just had some people go out of office. Instead of holding an election, he's appointing his flunkies. He's trying to consolidate power. That is my impression of what he's trying to do."

One proposal that was approved gives the union leadership more oversight on officers doing fund-raising.

6-Month Gap for Vote Count

Perhaps the most controversial item moves up the election for Local 100 officers to next June but delays the vote tally until December.

Critics have said that holding the election six months earlier but counting ballots after such a lengthy delay would cause members to think the election wasn't fair even if the AAA was certifying it.

Another change augments a current bylaw that bars members from running for a leadership position such as president or union recording secretary while also running for a lower division position. The change mandates that anyone who ran for a high office and lost could not run for a division position 18 months after the election if a vacancy arose.

A Manhattan Bus Operator, who spoke conditioned on anonymity, voted against the amendments because he believed the union did not adequately explain to the members why it wanted to make the changes.

"They're trying to pass things without speaking to the membership," he said.