Round 2 in the internet battle in AFSCME DC37

Send to friend

SUBSCRIBE to Union Democracy Review!

On September 12th, the AFSCME Judicial Panel issued its decision in a case involving rank-and-file use of the internet. Cody Childs, secretary of AFSCME Local 2627, in New York City's DC37, was the only member of his opposition slate to win in a fall 2005 rerun election. No complaint was ever filed challenging his election; but several months later, the local executive board demanded that he reimburse the local for $2,400 in lawyer's fees that it claimed were incurred because of his website use around the time of the election. The local president had retained the lawyer to charge Childs with misrepresenting his own websites as the official local site. At a local meeting, the membership rejected the board recommendation and instead voted to require the E-Board members who voted to assess Childs to come up with the money! In May, charges were filed against Childs with the AFSCME Judicial Panel. The complainant asked that Childs be suspended from the union for three years and be ordered to reimburse the local for its related costs, including the $2,400 it paid a lawyer to tell him to cease and desist.

In its decision, the one-man panel held that Childs was prohibited by the AFSCME constitution from maintaining, without the local's authorization, websites registered to him --- "local 2627.us", "local 2627.info", and "local 2627.net---- and from using Local2627@aol.com as an email address, arguing that members could have confused Childs's sites with the local's. The panel concluded, however, that a name that included an identification of the addressee as a member or group of members-- for examples, "local2627member" or "Local 2627 members for a better union"-- would have been acceptable as an email address. Further, the panel officer said, Childs's homepage was so similar to the local's that it was apparently intended to deceive the membership and affect the outcome of the election.

The panel hearing officer did acknowledge that corrective modifications were made by Childs immediately upon the threat of legal action, including a disclaimer that his site was unofficial and independent of the local; but the officer concluded that much of its design and content remained the same, thus requiring redesign of the local's site. He ordered that Childs be formally reprimanded and warned against repetition. He ordered Childs to make restitution to the local for both legal costs of $2,400 and the cost of the local's website redesign (which the local claims was some $650) and also ordered that he cease using the website names and email address.

Childs replies that he has the right to choose his own site names; but he has changed them to accommodate the panel's concerns. Further, he says that he changed the website within hours after a simple phone message from the attorney. Had any elected local officials called him, the result would have been the same. It was unnecessary, and their choice, he argues, to bring in an expensive attorney . In any event, the fees are completely disproportionate in the circumstances. Moreover, he adds, the local president was never properly authorized to retain an outside attorney.

Childs also replies that after he altered his site, no one could have reasonably confused it with the official union site. Therefore, he claims, because redesign of the union website was unnecessary, the costs should not be shifted to him.

Arguing that the trial officer denied him an opportunity to present evidence on these points and failed to properly consider the evidence that was presented, Childs has appealed the decision to the full AFCME judicial panel.

Cyber-democracy: your legal rights online.(handout)

See also:
AUD's 50 Guidelines for building an effective rank-and-file website, and the sample homepage.
The labortech tag on del.icio.us.