Thompson v. Office and Professional Employees Intern. Union, AFL-CIO

Citation74 F.3d 1492
Decision Date08 February 1996
Docket NumberD,AFL-CI,No. 94-5399,94-5399
Parties151 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2425, 131 Lab.Cas. P 11,506 P.J. THOMPSON, et al., Plaintiffs, Phillip R. Pope, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. OFFICE AND PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION,efendant-Appellant.
CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)

Peter Alliman, Lee, Alliman & Carson, Madisonville, TN, Carol S. Nickle, Carol Nickle & Associates, Knoxville, TN, Arthur L. Fox (argued and briefed), Washington, DC, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Joseph E. Finley, Baltimore, MD, Melvin S. Schwarzwald, Todd M. Smith, Schwarzwald & Brock, Cleveland, OH, Lucinda M. Finley (argued and briefed), SUNY at Buffalo School of Law, Buffalo, NY, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: JONES and RYAN, Circuit Judges; MATIA, District Judge. *

RYAN, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which JONES, J., joined. MATIA, D.J. (pp. 1510-12), delivered a separate opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part.

RYAN, Circuit Judge.

The defendant, Office and Professional Employees International Union (OPEIU), appeals the jury verdict for the plaintiff in this action under the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA), 29 U.S.C. Sec. 411(a)(1), (2) and (5), arising from the termination of the plaintiff's position as a business representative for the OPEIU following the imposition and lifting of a trusteeship. We are asked to determine: (1) whether Pope has standing to bring a claim under the LMRDA; (2) whether the district court erred in permitting a jury to decide issues surrounding the imposition and maintenance of the trusteeship; (3) whether the district court erred in admitting letters from the United States Department of Labor; (4) whether there was sufficient evidence for the jury to conclude that the trusteeship was maintained as a purposeful and deliberate attempt to suppress dissent within the local union; (5) whether the district court erred in directing a verdict for Pope on the issue of whether Pope's union membership rights were violated when he was issued a withdrawal card after he was fired; (6) whether there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's award of emotional distress damages; (7) whether there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's award of punitive damages; and (8) whether the district court erred in refusing to grant OPEIU's motion for a mistrial on the grounds that Pope spoke with the jury foreman. We conclude that the district court did not err and that there is sufficient evidence to support the jury verdict.

A detailed recitation of the facts is necessary for an adequate understanding of our decision.

I.

After twenty eight years of working in the labor union movement in positions that required significant travel obligations, Phillip Pope joined Local 268 of the OPEIU in Knoxville, Tennessee, as a business representative. Pope was appointed, not elected, to the position. The position allowed Pope to spend more time at home with his new family. The OPEIU represents employees at companies such as the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) and Baptist Hospital. 1 His position as business representative is described in the job description as "that of [an] agent for the union in its various dealings with management and as advisor to the Local Union officers various matters concerning contract negotiations, training of job stewards, grievance processing, and organizational activities." The job description also provides that the business representative "should be" a dues-paying member of OPEIU Local 268." Pope's understanding was that this provision did not require him to join the local union. During his interview for the position, Tim Witt, the President of the Executive Board of Local 268 at the time, informed Pope that he should join the union but that he would not force him to become a member.

Soon after Pope began working for Local 268, he concluded that the Executive Board was, in several respects, acting in violation of the local's bylaws, the OPEIU constitution, and federal law. Pope learned, for example,

. that one person on the board held two positions in violation of the local and international unions' constitutions;

. that the board improperly increased membership dues in violation of Title I of the LMRDA, 29 U.S.C. Sec. 411(a)(3);

. that the board did not sign checks with the proper number of signatures in violation of the local and international unions' constitutions;

. that the board was improperly scheduling elections and meetings for nominations;

. that the board improperly handpicked delegates to be sent to the OPEIU convention and was improperly using union funds for political purposes; and

. that telephone calls from members to the local office were always answered by an answering machine and that grievances were lost and not processed.

Pope brought these illegalities to the attention of the board and the members of the OPEIU leadership. As to the problems regarding the elections, Pat Allen, the Secretary-Treasurer of the Executive Board, responded that the board had been running the elections the same way for twenty years and that they did not need Pope telling them how to run their elections. When Pope informed Faye Orr of the OPEIU in June of 1989, Orr told Pope that the international union did not get involved in politics and suggested that he discuss the problems with the local board. Nevertheless, Orr, in June 1989, wrote an internal OPEIU memorandum stating:

To keep you further informed on the internal politics.

. . . . .

To make matters worse, gossip is out that Phillip [Pope] is trying to have Pat [Allen] ousted from the Executive Board and as Shop President. To keep the International cleared from all the suspicion, I am dealing almost exclusively in matters such as this with Pat or Tim Witt.

During this time, morale within Local 268 was at an all-time low mainly due to massive layoffs by the TVA. Pope, when asked, was more than willing to share his discoveries of the board's illegalities with members of the union. Support for Pope grew within the union and soon a slate of candidates was formed to run against the incumbent board in the December 1989 elections. Pope was the challengers' choice to run for president of the board. Pope testified that the slate stood for "making our union responsive to the will of the members which meant probably kicking out most, if not all, of the old officers, bringing our constitution and bylaws up to date like should have been done, running our union the way it should be run, [and] being more responsive to the members' problems [and] needs."

According to Pope, in April or May of 1989, he had a conversation with Orr in which Orr stated that "she understood that Jim Cash and [he] were planning on running for local union office or president of our local union." Pope responded that at that time he was "still testing the waters." Orr allegedly responded, "let me tell you. There is no way in hell OPEIU will tolerate that...." Orr also allegedly had a similar conversation with Jim Cash, the business agent of the OPEIU Local 18 in Alabama. According to Cash, Orr telephoned him and said, "what's this I hear about you and Phillip [Pope] running for President of the locals." Cash responded, "well, what's wrong with that, Faye, we're both members." Orr then answered, "you know that the OPEIU is not going to allow that."

In August 1989, two months before nominations for the December elections were to take place, the incumbent board proposed a change to the local's constitution. The proposed change would read: "All full-time paid staff of the local and all representatives of the international union shall be associate members of this local with the privileges of participating in this local's meetings but not voting." Because Pope was a full-time paid staff member, he interpreted this provision as designed to prevent him from running for office.

In an October 16, 1989 meeting, Allen moved to fire Pope. Allen withdrew the motion for lack of support and resigned from office. Maxine Keeble, another member of the board, moved to force Pope to stop "politicking" or to resign. A member of the reform slate, Jo Davenport, was voted in to replace Allen. The membership then voted and passed a proposal that Pope run for president. The meeting ended abruptly, without adjournment, when members of the local simply walked out.

This October meeting was described by members of the board as chaotic and out of control. Cletus Walles described the meeting as follows:

[I]t wasn't a meeting, it was a joke, it was a boisterous, unruly people, they were talking out of turn, it really wasn't a meeting. You couldn't call it a meeting because we weren't going by any rules and regulations of a meeting. Various things were said, a lot of emotions were being shown at that meeting; all I was trying to do is tell people to sit down and be quiet ... so the executive board could get on with their session and I said I'm not conducting any new business at this meeting, period, and I said that from the start, but as far as being a meeting, there was a lot of disruption.

Keeble testified that Pope was "tearing the union to pieces" and creating schisms on the board. Witt testified that ever since Pope arrived at Local 268, the board was divided between his supporters and opposers. He was very concerned that the division was affecting the operation of the local union. Pat Sing, another board member, described Pope as being in complete control of some members of the board.

After the meeting, members of the board discussed what had occurred. They learned that Orr was in town and arranged to meet with her at a Hyatt Hotel in Knoxville. Orr advised them that they could ask the international union to place the local under trusteeship. The board members then wrote a letter, dated October 18, 1989, to the President of the OPEIU, John Kelly, requesting that he impose a "voluntary...

To continue reading

Request your trial
26 cases
  • Bauer v. Rbx Industries, Inc., 02-4327.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit
    • 17 Mayo 2004
    ... ... a corporation and a group of its former employees following the closing of a manufacturing facility ... between the corporation and the employees' union terminates a previously negotiated Collective ... , the United Steel Workers of America, AFL-CIO ("USWA"), and RBX signed a Settlement agreement ... Thompson v. Office & Prof'l Employees Int'l Union, 74 ... ...
  • Clark v. Teamsters Local Union 651
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Kentucky
    • 24 Octubre 2018
    ... ... Clark and Estepp are former employees of Teamsters Local Union 651. Clark was hired in ... relationships with male employees in the office. [Record No. 74-1, p. 222-23, Record No. 74-2, p ... union business representative in Thompson v. Office and Professional Employees Int'l Union, AFL-CIO , 74 F.3d 1492, 1510 (6th Cir. 1996). The ... ...
  • Casumpang v. International Longshore & Warehouse
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Hawaii
    • 31 Octubre 2005
    ... ... INTERNATIONAL LONGSHORE & WAREHOUSE UNION, LOCAL 142, and Eusebio Lapenia, Jr., Defendants ... Victorino, clerks at the Maui division office of ILWU, testified regarding information they ... $300,000 for an employer with over 500 employees. See 42 U.S.C. § 1981a(b)(3) ... Page 1221 ... See Thompson v. Office and Professional Employees Int'l Union, AFL-CIO, 74 F.3d 1492, 1500, 1509 (6th Cir.1996) ... ...
  • Boardman v. Serv. Emps. Int'l Union
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois
    • 28 Febrero 2020
    ... ... SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION a/k/a SEIU, Service Employees ... the "members that had placed Boardman in office." ( Id. ) Boardman publicly "refus[ed] to ... , 2019 WL 1294697, at *8 (quoting Thompson v. Office of Prof'l Emps. Int'l Union, AFL-CIO , ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • Evidence
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Trial Objections
    • 5 Mayo 2022
    ...hearsay resulted in a lack of the necessary indicia of reliability. Thompson v. Office and Professional Employees Intern. Union , AFL-CIO, 74 F.3d 1492, 1506 (6th Cir.), cert. denied, 117 S. Ct. 482 (1996). The existence of facts, conclusions, or evaluations in a public record or report doe......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT