1847 Yunk v. UAW Local Union 1102 Executive Board

Case No: 1847


Appellant filed an Article 31 charge alleging that his Local Committeeperson failed to respond appropriately to his workplace concerns.  The Local Executive Board found that Appellant’s charge was improper because the act complained of does not sustain a claim of conduct unbecoming a member under Article 31, §3(c).  The PRB agrees with that conclusion.  The PRB has long held that local officers should not be required to answer to Article 31 charges based on actions or omissions arising from the performance of their official responsibilities.  The PRB has carved out a narrow exception to this rule for actions taken with malice or the specific intent to injure the interests of the charging party.  In addition, the Board has recognized an exception where the charged act involves an actual violation of the Constitution as opposed to a lapse in judgment.  Here, however, Appellant has not claimed that the Committeeperson acted out of malice or with a specific intent to harm his interests — and no facts are alleged that would support such a claim.  Moreover, there is no allegation that the Committeeperson committed any violation of the Constitution through his conduct toward Appellant. 

If any one of the criteria contained in Article 31, §3 is not satisfied, then the charge should be rejected.  Because the PRB finds that the charge is improper under Section 3(c), it is unnecessary to address the International Union’s additional arguments under Sections 3(a) and 3(d) of Article 31.

Issues addressed in this decision