Background

On or about July 28, 2003, at the Ninth Convention of the UTU International, the parent body, conducted an election for the constitutional office of International President. At or on this date, Byron A. Boyd was elected to the office President using the "delegate" voting system in an opposed election contest. The unsuccessful candidate in this election was Jimmy Alford, 4153 S. Hulen – Apt. #1524, Ft. Worth, Texas, 76109. Phone – 817-926-3921

On November 13, 2003, the U.S. Attorney in Houston, Texas, filed an indictment naming Boyd, another former UTU President, and two UTU employees, in various counts of criminal activities. The Grand Jury issued the allegations based on the testimony of over thirty (30) "employers" 1 that admitted making cash contributions to Boyd’s 2003 election campaign. After the original indictment, UTU employee Ralph Dennis entered a plea of guilty and provided additional information concerning the operation of an illegal criminal enterprise that he (and others) had worked to create for the benefit of himself and Boyd since his appointment as a high ranking UTU officer beginning in 1996.

Dennis’s testimony directly implicated Boyd in a criminal conspiracy that included, among other things, the illegal solicitation and receipt of secret cash contributions from "employers" for the benefit of Boyd’s 2003 election campaign. The "employers" identified in the indictment were a group of attorneys that sought to do business with the UTU as personal injury trial lawyers.

After learning of the campaign violations, I requested and received a copy of the Grand Jury’s indictment and Dennis’ Plea Agreement, on or about January 3, 2004. After reviewing the allegations against Boyd, on January 9, 2004, I filed a protest of the election with the UTU International President, as required by Article 16. (Exhibit 1)

After receiving no response on January 26, 2004, a second letter was drafted to the President requesting a response to my complaint. (Exhibit 2) The purpose of this letter was to expedite administrative handling, so the complaint could be appealed to the April 6, 2004, meeting of the UTU International Board of Directors as provided for under the provisions of Article 75.

(Note: The President’s decision must be appealed to the Board of Directors within 90 days, and all appeals must be docketed 30 days prior to the Board’s meeting)

In a separate, but relevant matter, on February 23, 2004, the UTU Executive Board conducted an internal trial proceeding based on allegations I made regarding the improper use of union funds to solicit and receive illegal campaign contributions in behalf of Boyd. As a result of this trial, Boyd was found guilty and suspended from office without pay.

On March 11, 2004, United States Attorney Michael Shelby announced that Byron Boyd pled guilty to labor racketeering conspiracy. At his arraignment hearing, Boyd told U.S. District Judge Sim Lake that he (and others) solicited and collected thousands of dollars in cash from attorneys seeking to become designated by the union and designated attorneys seeking to keep to their designation. Boyd also admitted that he and Little caused Ralph Dennis and John Rookard to travel at union expense around the United States to personally solicit cash from "employers" for Boyd's 2003 campaign. (Exhibit 3)

Under the disability of a felony conviction, Boyd became disqualified by law from employment with the UTU for a period of 13 years after the completion of any term of imprisonment resulting from this conviction.

In keeping with the UTU Constitution, on or about March 12, 2004, Assistant President Paul Thompson was elevated to the office of President as provided for in the UTU Constitution.

On March 31, 2004, I requested a response from President Thompson to my January 9, 2004, election complaint and requested that Thompson make a decision regarding my complaint as required by Article 16. (Exhibit 4)

On April 5, 2004, President Thompson responded by declining to accept jurisdiction of the complaint. (Exhibit 5) In denying my request, the following intentional misrepresentations were given by Thompson:

1. No procedure contained in the UTU Constitution with respect to protesting an International election.
2. 2. Election protest appeared to be "untimely."
1. Protest within the jurisdiction of the Department of Labor and not the UTU.
2. Protest was "moot" because Byron Boyd was no longer International President.

Allegation of Wrong Doing

Article 16 provides that the International President interpret all laws of the organization, decide all questions arising therefrom, and decide all other controversies not provided for under existing laws of the organization. In addition, the President is required to perform such other duties and responsibilities as may be necessary for the proper conduct of the affairs of the organization and the accomplishment of its objectives. After taking office, Brother Thompson was required to immediately fulfill his Article 16 duties and responsibilities.

I allege that President Thompson failed to fulfill his duty and responsibility to decide the election complaint submitted to him for consideration. I allege that the facts of the complaint were substantiated by the evidence of four (4) guilty pleas, and President Thompson acted in his own best interests in not ordering a new fair election free of corruption. I allege that Brother Thompson’s actions were self-serving, and were not in keeping with his fiduciary obligation of duty, and loyalty to the members. I allege that President’s Thompson actions prevented internal resolution of the election complaint, requiring government intervention by the Department of Labor.

Article 16, specifically places President Thompson as the Chief Executive Office of the United Transportation Union. So situated, the International President enjoys unilateral authority to administer the affairs, including the administrative affairs, of the UTU. Bound by Article 16, Thompson is solely responsible to the membership for the proper conduct of the affairs of the organization and the accomplishment of its objectives.

I submit that the exercise of democracy through fair elections is in keeping with proper conduct of the affairs of the UTU and necessary for the accomplishment of its objective. Working within the union structure is of the utmost importance in this regard.