What specific rule cancelled the 2021 National Convention?

I understand the need for an election. The convention, not so much. For years different states have put up resolutions trying to get the convention schedule to every other year, but the retirees kept voting it down. Maybe the lack of the convention is a good thing. They are expensive and regular working carriers are getting to be fewer and fewer as there is no office coverage available in many cases, so the delegates are retirees that, in some cases, haven't got a clue what goes on in the rural craft today. So again, I say we need an election, but not necessarily a convention.

The disgraced former 1st historic female president of the NRLCA. Whom oversaw such great things as Sunday delivery, Amazon without pay, and Table 2. Not elected, and still representing as committeeperson and despite the expired term...

She said it was because of the restrictions set by local and state officials. And that securing a venue on short notice is almost impossible. Many places are booked years in advance. And that a teleconference was beyond their abilities.

I'm sure there's something in the bylaws about meeting in person as well. And that only like 12 states had their meeting. So no delegates would've been selected to represent the whole.

I'm sure they're all sitting around saying how nice it is to not have to deal with elections and fighting for the rights and working conditions of the union. They can really get things done now.

I certainly would love to send a motion to censure the board. And move to reduce wages to step 9 of Table 2 as the max. Until it is eliminated, all should feel the pain.

LostinDakota said:

I understand the need for an election. The convention, not so much. For years different states have put up resolutions trying to get the convention schedule to every other year, but the retirees kept voting it down. Maybe the lack of the convention is a good thing. They are expensive and regular working carriers are getting to be fewer and fewer as there is no office coverage available in many cases, so the delegates are retirees that, in some cases, haven't got a clue what goes on in the rural craft today. So again, I say we need an election, but not necessarily a convention.

Click to expand...

Conventions are the only opportunity for member representatives (delegates) to decide the direction to lead the Association. When you cut the convention, you cut the membership's voice and mind.

Retired or not, if I sit as delegate, I will never vote for a biennial convention. I (personally) don't believe it is a good thing. It severely widens the contol and communications gap between the members and the elected. That reduces the National Board's transparency even greater than it already is. Know what the National Board does outside of a convention? Have anyone here ever read National Board meeting minutes?

This thread is a perfect example of what problems distancing the Board from the membership can cause. The specific federal or state law, regulation or ordinance that permitted the National Board to cancel the convention is seemingly shrouded in secrecy.

This earlier post even supported the notion that, since it was too late to appeal, we should just keep our mouths shut. Such ideology promotes cloak and dagger behavior - "If you can conceal your wrongdoings for 30 days, you're off the hook!"

If "lack of coverage" is a major premise to adopt a biennial convention, to get it passed, all the Board and upper-level stewards (hand-picked by and under direction of the Board) must do is weakly pursue coverage and claim they're "doing the best they can." It becomes a self-fulfilling result.

Not all retirees are clueless just as not all active carriers are knowledgeable. If members want less retirees at a convention, their delegate ballots will show exactly that. If members want a delegate cap to each class of member, they need to pass an amendment to make it happen. Naturally, such consideration would first require a convention.

As for what specific federal or state laws, regulations or ordinances permitted the National Board to cancel the 2021 National Convention, the search continues!

@Dominator facts don't matter to the NRLCA. I have a pile of settlements to prove it. Even my most recent one added to the 603 to skirt a "must not" from the pom. These people go out of their way to ignore facts and fight for management. I think they fight more to keep their cush $95,000-$160,000 salary. No elections, keep on raking in the dough!

Morty said:

@Dominator facts don't matter to the NRLCA. I have a pile of settlements to prove it. Even my most recent one added to the 603 to skirt a "must not" from the pom. These people go out of their way to ignore facts and fight for management. I think they fight more to keep their cush $95,000-$160,000 salary. No elections, keep on raking in the dough!

Click to expand...

The "chosen" culture certainly seems to support this. Many delegates suffer from "title worship", which effects include loss of independent thought.

Just because a title is slapped on a person, that doesn't magically make them knowledgeable.

The delegates have selected the salary as it is in the constitution, but I don't believe many of them grasp what a National Officer's package deal actually is. Additional pay and benefits have been tacked on over the years under the sympathetic cry of, "We have to take care of our own!" made by appointed stewards and committee members.

They stand among us and feast upon our charitable dues, without fear.

The Constitution is the mess that it is. It's poorly drafted, but if they constitutionally deserve the pay, so be it. I'm simply trying to determine if they satisfied the requirement to cancel the 2021 convention.

Whether that includes another 6-figure shoe-in is a different question.

Perhaps a phone call, letter, discovery request, etc. to Peer , Gan & Gisler would shed some light .

Chickenlover said:

What I got from the article is that if a convention is canceled/delayed the union officials should have contacted the NLRB or Office of Labor Management Standards and given them a written reason as to why. It should be transparent and easy to find your answer. I would contact the NLRB or OLMS to find the answer. Even call the NRLCA, I am sure they have nothing to hide on this issue.

Click to expand...

Union officer elections for a union are not inherently entitled to be held at conventions. "Officer Elections" can be their own event if a union's constitution provides. The helpful link you supplied focused on a cancelled or postponed election, not a cancelled convention.

The NRLCA constitution holds our elections during conventions. If, by law, our union is mandated to hold an election despite the cancellation or postponement of a convention, the provisions highlighted here...


... would both be activated.

The Board would gain limited, temporary authority to amend the constitution, but no greater authority than what is necessary to conform to Federal law. Any unnecessary or unauthorized act would would be a constitutional violation.

In addition, those portions of the constitution that obligate elections to occur during a convention would lose their force and effect due to their supersession by Federal law.

I've contacted OLMS and NLRB, but it typically takes them a bit of time to get back to inquiries. I've figured if someone on this site knows the answer though, they'd certainly dish it out. If not, that's alright too.

I don't know whether the National Office has something to hide. Many of the answers I've received from the office come across to me as incoherent, inconsistent, or both. Maybe my questions are just confusing them and they're trying their best. I'm not sure. It has grown to become a very unattractive option for me. I may be funneled to them if my other options turn fruitless.

I tried Gan's D.C. office though phone and email a while back on a different issue, but got no response. Maybe the message was lost in transit, or perhaps his contract with the NRLCA doesn't permit outside inquiries without Board consent. I believe whatever the issue was, it was later resolved, so further contact was unnecessary.

Dominator, I see your point where not having conventions removes a chance for the masses to mingle with the elected officials. But even with annual conventions, we, as part of the masses, have little to no interaction with the national board. There are many modes and methods of communication that could be utilized. For years the monthly magazine featured photos of select people attending workshops, but no information for the rest of us explaining what was learned or done at said workshops. Same with the regional conferences, same with the national website, same with info on RRECS(oh, so many years of no information). The stated reason why no info is put on paper or the website is that management might use it against us in negotiations(so what is new about that?) But I am tired of needing to rely on boards like this to find out relevant information to do my job and be paid properly. The national board has never been transparent about anything, ever. And I am not even sure about an election making a difference. It seems musical chairs are played and they all just take a different position at the trough. Cynical I know, but after 30+ years of the same, I am tired.

Dominator said:

Many of the answers I've received from the office come across to me as incoherent, inconsistent, or both.

Click to expand...

You mean kinda' like this ?

Mostly for @Dominator again but, of course, for all ; I was looking at The Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act and there may very well be some beef in there for ammo. As far as a time table, it appears that there may be a bit more time to file something provided the person(s) making the inquiry have exhausted all avenues within the C&B of their Union. It's Title IV in The LMRDA and Title 29 USCFR sub and sections 481-483. There's more I need to look into in BOTH areas and there is A LOT of subs and sections and A LOT of Titles. At any rate, what I am seeing is very explicit and defining regarding elections and the conduction thereof. I have found no wiggle room . I am not saying it isn't there just that I have not found it yet. I'll see if there is some kind of link for decisions regarding complaints filed with the Secretary of Labor for precedence.

LostinDakota said:

Dominator, I see your point where not having conventions removes a chance for the masses to mingle with the elected officials. But even with annual conventions, we, as part of the masses, have little to no interaction with the national board. There are many modes and methods of communication that could be utilized. For years the monthly magazine featured photos of select people attending workshops, but no information for the rest of us explaining what was learned or done at said workshops. Same with the regional conferences, same with the national website, same with info on RRECS(oh, so many years of no information). The stated reason why no info is put on paper or the website is that management might use it against us in negotiations(so what is new about that?) But I am tired of needing to rely on boards like this to find out relevant information to do my job and be paid properly. The national board has never been transparent about anything, ever. And I am not even sure about an election making a difference. It seems musical chairs are played and they all just take a different position at the trough. Cynical I know, but after 30+ years of the same, I am tired.

Click to expand...

I think it would be lacking to not be cynical after 30+ years of filling others pockets and getting crumbs in return.

Our National Board's culture (at least of the National Board's I've seen) has consistently been fear-based, always struggling, but "just about" to succeed.

"Title worship" comes into play and many members just gobble it all up without question, while the inquisitive are demonized and burned at stake for "hindering progress".

I too have been given the "management may use it against us" boogeyman argument.

It's a reliable backdoor because it's an unfalsifiable "doomsday prophecy" device coming from an authority figure.

If there is no problem then it "proves itself correct". However, if things go south, they can always point to the target as the cause. @Ruralinfo has been a common target for this fallacious argument for many, many years.

The argumentative break down of that position though, is:

It is more advantageous for the National Board to keep the membership ignorant than to risk being quoted.

It's so messed up.

As I've written elsewhere, if there were an election to turn the tide, this next one with all but 1 open seat is it. If all we get is musical chairs though, the future of the table two community is written on the wall.

I'm convinced that is why there is no specific federal or state laws, regulations or ordinances published in an NRLCA document that could satisfy the conditions necessary to have cancelled the 2021 convention.

If nobody raises the question, then "authorities" do not risk being quoted.

Dominator said:

I think it would be lacking to not be cynical after 30+ years of filling others pockets and getting crumbs in return

Click to expand...

I thought pretty much the same thing. @LostinDakota would be derelict in his / her duty if he /she were NOT cynical.

neciat said:

Mostly for @Dominator again but, of course, for all ; I was looking at The Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act and there may very well be some beef in there for ammo. As far as a time table, it appears that there may be a bit more time to file something provided the person(s) making the inquiry have exhausted all avenues within the C&B of their Union. It's Title IV in The LMRDA and Title 29 USCFR sub and sections 481-483. There's more I need to look into in BOTH areas and there is A LOT of subs and sections and A LOT of Titles. At any rate, what I am seeing is very explicit and defining regarding elections and the conduction thereof. I have found no wiggle room . I am not saying it isn't there just that I have not found it yet. I'll see if there is some kind of link for decisions regarding complaints filed with the Secretary of Labor for precedence.

Click to expand...

Exhaustion of the internal appeals process ends at a convention.

Though I (or any other member) could try the internal appeals route, since the event which concludes the appeals process is the same event whose cancellation is being questioned, there seems be a looping problem.

Thanks for the helpful source, @neciat. I'll have to check that out too. The search continues!

Dominator said:

Exhaustion of the internal appeals process ends at a convention

Click to expand...

Okay. If that process ends at the convention, that would legally infer "it" began , which it did not. I see you referenced that in your post. I'll need to go back and confirm this, but I believe I saw where the time limit was 90 days AFTER 30 days AFTER one has exhausted all avenues available within their union's bylaws / constitution. So, a total of 120 days, of which 30 days for "in house" appeals, complaints, etc.

neciat said:

Okay. If that process ends at the convention, that would legally infer "it" began , which it did not. I see you referenced that in your post. I'll need to go back and confirm this, but I believe I saw where the time limit was 90 days AFTER 30 days AFTER one has exhausted all avenues available within their union's bylaws / constitution. So, a total of 120 days, of which 30 days for "in house" appeals, complaints, etc.

Click to expand...

Here's the entirety of it.


The appeals process is laughable. The Board could trample on the constitution all year long, and, if a member appeals the case, they'll likely have to wait for the convention to speak for 2 minutes on their issue, while the 9 Board members get 18 minutes, combined. (Don't forget the cronies willingness 2 minutes to add the two bits that were given to them.)

The hand-picked National Appeals Committee consistently (and miraculously) sees eye-to-eye with the National Board every time. It's almost as though they're told what to do by an allegedly superior body...

I suspect any appeal on this issue would result in the Board denying the accusation, then the Committee agreeing with the Board at the convention. The debate against the appellant would regurgitate the claims from the newspaper, and a majority of the body would morph into full-on bobblehead mode!

The next step would include the member suing the union, and hashing it out in court. Who knows from there.

Well, the 90 day period to which I was referring was one I loosely recollected from the LMRDA. That Labor Management Reporting Disclosure Act gives more time to file a protest. Given the above, one could not exhaust all avenues in house because the opportunity was not made available. And I have been to enough conventions to totally relate to your assessment of bobblehead mode. Like a choreographed / hypnotized / rehearsed / zombie response in the affirmative. No one wants to rock the boat. We need people willing to sink the boat.

neciat said:

Well, the 90 day period to which I was referring was one I loosely recollected from the LMRDA. That Labor Management Reporting Disclosure Act gives more time to file a protest. Given the above, one could not exhaust all avenues in house because the opportunity was not made available. And I have been to enough conventions to totally relate to your assessment of bobblehead mode. Like a choreographed / hypnotized / rehearsed / zombie response in the affirmative. No one wants to rock the boat. We need people willing to sink the boat.

Click to expand...

If the Board can make up rules to cancel conventions, I think the boat will sink itself before too long.

If the members are indifferent, I don't think there is really much stopping the National Board from canceling the 2022 convention. They'd just implement some voting system to satisfy the DOL election requirement.

If "renting out a stadium" is a consideration for next year, certainly it could have been done this year.

I'm just looking for the rule they relied on to cancel the 2021 convention. If that little nugget pops up, my curiosity on this question will be satisfied.

Dominator said:

I'm just looking for the rule they relied on to cancel the 2021 convention. If that little nugget pops up, my curiosity on this question will be satisfied.

Click to expand...

I know. It is terribly frustrating. I was / am looking at CFR and that LMRDA to see if there was anything in there. But, as I said, when the announcement came out to cancel the convention, nothing was cited. We were all considered ESSENTIAL employees during this whole thing so it would stand to reason that it is ESSENTIAL that our processes or reasonable facsimile thereof would also be ESSENTIAL.

neciat said:

I know. It is terribly frustrating. I was / am looking at CFR and that LMRDA to see if there was anything in there. But, as I said, when the announcement came out to cancel the convention, nothing was cited. We were all considered ESSENTIAL employees during this whole thing so it would stand to reason that it is ESSENTIAL that our processes or reasonable facsimile thereof would also be ESSENTIAL.

Click to expand...

Not knowing is frustrating. If it's lawful, then okay, but if not, then no way!

I didn't see any specifics that support the Board's action, but that doesn't mean there isn't some orphan redirect somewhere else.

My question was forwarded to the OLMS district office in D.C.

I hope these guys have a better answer than "Take it through your internal process, then get back with us."

We shall see.

Dominator said:

I hope these guys have a better answer than "Take it through your internal process, then get back with us."

Click to expand...

I trust your question also included some background specifics regarding the amount of time you would have to wait in order to "take it through your internal process" .