Skip to page content
Office of Labor-Management Standards
Bookmark and Share

Office of Labor-Management Standards (OLMS)

U.S. Department of Labor
Employment Standards Administration
Office of Labor-Management Standards
Baltimore Resident Office
103 South Gay Street, Suite 102
Baltimore, MD 21202
(410)244-7157 Fax: (410)244-5248

April 16, 2007

Mr. Michael Walker, Treasurer
United Auto Workers
Local 1338
460 Franklin Street
Harve De Grace, MD 21078

Re: Case Number

Dear Mr. Walker:

This office has recently completed an audit of Government Security Officers Local 56 under the Compliance Audit Program (CAP) to determine your organization's compliance with the provisions of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 (LMRDA). As discussed during the exit interview with you on February 1, 2007, the following problems were disclosed during the CAP. The matters listed below are not an exhaustive list of all possible problem areas since the audit conducted was limited in scope.

Title II of the LMRDA establishes certain reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Section 206 requires, among other things, that adequate records be maintained for at least 5 years by which each receipt and disbursement of funds, as well as all account balances, can be verified, explained, and clarified. As a general rule, all records used or received in the course of union business must be retained. This includes, in the case of disbursements, not only the retention of original bills, invoices, receipts, and vouchers, but also adequate additional documentation, if necessary, showing the nature of the union business requiring the disbursement, the goods or services received, and the identity of the recipient(s) of the goods or services. In most instances, this documentation requirement can be satisfied with a sufficiently descriptive expense receipt or invoice. If an expense receipt is not sufficiently descriptive, a note can be written on it providing the additional information. An exception may be made only in those cases where 1) other equally descriptive documentation has been maintained, and 2) there is evidence of actual oversight and control over disbursements.

In the case of receipts, the date, amount, purpose, and source of all money received by the union must be recorded in at least one union record. Bank records must also be retained for all accounts.

The audit of Local 56's records for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2005 revealed the following recordkeeping violation:

  • Local 56 failed to maintain its meeting minutes for the audit year.

As agreed, provided that Local 56 maintains adequate documentation for this item in the future, no additional enforcement action will be taken regarding this violation.

The CAP disclosed a violation of LMRDA Section 201(b), which requires labor organizations to file annual financial reports accurately disclosing their financial condition and operations. The Labor Organization Annual Report (Form LM-3) filed by Local 56 for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2005, was deficient in the following areas:

  • Local 56 failed to include payments to officers in Item 24 (All Officers and Disbursements to Officers). Such payments appear to have been erroneously reported in Item 48, Office and Administrative Expense. All direct disbursements to Local 56 officers and some indirect disbursements made on behalf of its officers must be reported in Item 24. A "direct disbursement" to an officer is a payment made to an officer in the form of cash, property, goods, services, or other things of value. An "indirect disbursement" to an officer is a payment to another party (including credit card companies) for cash, property, goods, services, or other things of value received by or on behalf of an officer. However, indirect disbursements for temporary lodging (such as a union check issued to a hotel) or for transportation by a public carrier (such as an airline) for an officer traveling on union business should be reported in Item 48 (Office and Administrative Expense).
  • The names of some officers and the total amounts of payments to them or on their behalf were not reported in Item 24 (All Officers and Disbursements to Officers). All persons who held office during the year must be reported in Item 24 regardless of whether or not they received any payments from the union.
  • The audit disclosed a violation of LMRDA Section 201(a), which requires that a union submit a copy of its revised constitution and bylaws with its LM report when it makes changes to its constitution or bylaws. Local 56 amended its constitution and bylaws in 2001, but did not file a copy with its LM report for that year.

Government Security Officers Local 56 has submitted an amended 2005 LM-3 Report correcting the errors listed above. Local 56 has also submitted a current copy of its constitution and bylaws. Therefore, no further action is being considered regarding these violations at this time.

The CAP disclosed the following other violation:

  • The audit revealed a violation of LMRDA Section 502 (Bonding), which requires that union officers and employees be bonded for no less than 10 percent of the total funds handled by those individuals or their predecessors during the preceding fiscal year. Local 56's officers and employees were not bonded, and they must be bonded for at least $6,200.00.

Adequate bonding coverage was obtained and documentation provided during the audit. No further enforcement action will be taken.

I want to extend my personal appreciation to Government Security Officers Local 56 for the cooperation and courtesy extended during this compliance audit. I strongly recommend that you make sure this letter and the compliance assistance materials provided to you are passed on to future officers. If we can provide any additional assistance, please do not hesitate to call.

Sincerely,
Investigator

cc: Richard Faragher, President