Judge Permits Suit By Postal Union Dissidents Seeking Spending Data

CHARLES BEMBRY: Questions about payments.

A Federal judge has denied a motion by the New York Metro Area Postal Union to dismiss a lawsuit alleging that the union's leadership failed to disclose financial records.

Executive Secretary Charles Bembry and another member have filed several complaints saying that the local rebuffed their requests for information stemming from its 2006-2007 LM2 report filed with the U.S. Labor Department. Originally, Mr. Bembry sought from union President Clarice Torrence a breakdown of contributions, consultant and attorney services and a copy of the board of trustees report. Mr. Bembry alleged that there were discrepancies in salaries and payments.

'Can't Hide Behind Technicalities'

In an amended complaint, Mr. Bembry and his colleague specifically targeted information regarding a 1998 agreement that the union had with Sprint to have a cell-phone tower mounted on its West 31st St. headquar- ters in exchange for $35,000 per year. They alleged that income from this deal was stated in the union's 2005 LM2 but not in the one for 2006, prompting their request for information. The union argued that it was not legally bound to provide such information.

"As long as discovery reveals that the relationship between the union and the building corporation was substantially unchanged from the 2004- 2005 reporting period to the 2005- 2006 and 2006-2007 reporting periods, the court finds that the building corporation information should have been disclosed," U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero said in a decision handed down March 12. "However, union members have now requested this information, and the union may not hide behind meeting the technical requirements of the forms when the information should have been disclosed under the law."

Mr. Bembry was elected on Ms. Torrence's slate in 2003, but defected two years later. He is running against her this year for the union's presidency. Ballots went out to members March 30, and a winner is scheduled to be declared in late April.

"[The judge] makes it clear that there's no wrongdoing on the union's part; it's a very technical ruling on what the law is or isn't," said Larry Cary, a lawyer for the union. "I don't believe the postal workers have done anything different than what any other unions have done."