(a) The reasonableness of applying a newly adopted restriction on
candidacy retroactively depends in part upon the nature of the
requirement. It would be unreasonable for a labor organization to
enforce eligibility requirements which the members had no opportunity to
satisfy. For example, it would not be
reasonable for a union to apply a newly adopted meeting attendance
requirement retroactively since members would have no opportunity to
comply with such requirement prior to its effective date. \33\ When such
a rule is in effect the membership is entitled to advance notice of the
requirements of the rule and of the means to be used in verifying
attendance. It would not be unreasonable, however, for a union to adopt
and enforce a rule disqualifying persons convicted of a felony from
being candidates or holding office.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ Hodgson v. Longshoremen's Local 1655, New Orleans Dray Clerks,
79 LRRM 2893, 67 L.C. para.12,466 (E.D. La. January 5, 1972)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(b) It would not be proper for a labor organization to amend its
constitution after an election to make eligible a person who had been
elected but who was not eligible at the time of the election.
