his "Freedom of Speech and Assembly" as guaranteed by Section
101(a)(2) of the Act. On the facts adduced by the evidence,
however, we find that the local union was attempting to
enforce reasonable rules and regulations, which it had the
right to do under Section 101(a)(1) and (2). Nor do we find
any violation of the statute by the International Union, and
judgment should be entered in its behalf on the Complaint.
Since the International Bylaws provide a 60 day limit for
the filing of charges, we do not believe that this matter
should be remanded to the union for further hearings, nor does
the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act provide for
such a procedure. Plaintiff's statutory rights have been
violated, and the controversy should end here.
It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed that judgment
be and it is entered in behalf of the plaintiff, and Local
Union 1091 or its successor is directed to restore him to full
membership status as of October 31, 1969.
It is further ordered, adjudged and decreed that this case
will be called on Friday, March 16, 1973 at 10 a. m. to set a
date for a hearing on damages and such other matters as may
remain to be decided in this case.
March 10, 1969
Mr. Richard Bennett, Rec. Sec.
USA, LOCAL UNION #1091
Blue Island, Illinois
This is to inform you that I am filing charges against a
member, George Kiepura, under the provision of the
International Constitution-United Steelworkers of America. He
is guilty of violating the intent and oath of the
The following are the charges:
1. He asks questions and makes statements, at
regular monthly meetings, which are stated in
such a way as to make officers, grievancemen
and stewards guilty of some wrong doing where
there isn't any wrong doings. This is
implication by tricky accusation. This is
unionism at its worst. This is destructive
union practices and not constructive union
practices which we are all pledged to do.
2. He disrupts meetings by being out of order,
speaks without being recognized, answers
members across the floor and disturbs meeting
causing the membership to pull away from the
meetings. The membership at the meetings is
dropping and many are giving above as their
3. He meets with the Company and demands that
the Company do certain things involving all
of the membership which he does not have the
right or authority to, he doesn't have the
right to represent the membership, this is a
violation of the Constitution — this is bad
4. He protests most union action in elections
without foundation and has never proven a
point or a thing. This is costly to the
membership, this is time consuming to the
officials. He questions cost and at the same
time is the cause of it. His dues would have
to be increased many times to pay his own way
on things stated above.
5. He was part of a contract violation in which
he was the member involved. He was
transferred to another department and senior
employees were laid off. The officer involved
in this violation was disciplined for his
action. This is the type of person we have,
he doesn't believe in Unionism or Brotherhood
when he is involved.
6. He went outside the local union to agitate
against the local union # 1091 on a point
which is a local
matter, the procedure of electing the
Grievance Committee body.
7. He doesn't believe in or will not accept the
concept in Organizational promotion where
seniority and ability are factors, he
believes in pressure to get his way or
destroy. This is Unionism on the lowest
I am requesting that you notify your president of the above
charges and that he complies with Article XIII of the
International Constitution and I will present my facts
concerning the above charges to the Trial Committee.