Olms interpretative Manual

MEMBERMUSTMAKEDEMAND

274.005DEMANDREQUIRED

The duty imposed upon a union and its officers under section 201(c) to permitexamination by a member, for just cause, of the supporting records necessary to verify a reportrequired to be submitted pursuant to sections 201(a) or (b) does not arise until there has been ademand setting forth just cause for the examination and relating the books, records and accountto a specific report.In the instant case, where such a demand was made by a union member andthirty days elapsed without a reply form the union, it was deemed sufficient to show a refusal ofthedemand by the union.

Further, where union members seek to enforce their rights to inspect union books andrecords under section 201(c) in a State court, matters of pleading and procedure are determinedbyStatelaw,thoughtherightto beenforcedisgovernedsubstantivelybyFederallaw.

Hendersonv.Sarle,197N.Y.S.2d920,922-23(Sup.Ct.N.Y.1960),45LRRM3037.


(TechnicalRevisions:Dec.2016)

274.100SPECIFICITYASTORECORDS

Anactionbyaunionmemberforaccesstounionrecordsundersection201(c),LMRDA,must fail where the request was in general terms for records extending over a period of time andinsufficient for the court to identify the records sought to determine whether they have beendenied or are the kind required to be disclosed under section 201(c), or whether the member hasshown just cause for having themproduced.

McCrawv. United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of Plumbing and Pipe FittingIndustry,216F.Supp.655,661(E.D.Tenn.1963),aff'd,341F.2d705(6thCir.1965),52LRRM
2516.
(TechnicalRevisions:Dec.2016)

REQUIREMENTOF“JUSTCAUSE” TOEXAMINEUNIONBOOKS

275.005JUSTCAUSE

The United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama set the followingstandards for determining the existence of “just cause” for the examination of records required tobe kept under Title II of the LMRDA:

In order to establish just cause to examine any books, records and accounts necessary toverify any report of a labor organization submitted pursuant to 29 U.S.C.A. 431 (section 201LMRDA), it is sufficient that a member of that organization show that there is reasonableground to believe that such report is incomplete or inexact, or that it inadequately explainsthe information required to be submitted.It is not necessary that it be shown, or that theCourt make any findings and conclusions, that the labor organization or any of its officershasin fact violated anylaw or any provision ofits Constitution or Bylaws.

Allenv.Local92,InternationalAssociationofBridge,Structural,andOrnamentalIronWorkers,47LRRM 2214(N.D.Ala.1960).

Relying on Allenand other precedents, the D.C. Circuit held that just cause does notrequire a union member to “show outright error or grossly suspicious items” on a union’sfinancial report, and is met “when a union member demonstrates a sudden, apparentlysignificant,andunexplainedchangeina[financialreport]item.SeeMallickv.Intern.

Brotherhoodof Elec.Workers, 749F.2d771,782-84,117LRRM3081,3085-90(D.C.Cir.1984).

Other federal appellate courts have been more general in describing the just cause standard.See,e.g., Fruit and Vegetable Packers and Warehousemen Local 760v. Morley, 378 F.2d 738, 744,65 LRRM 2424, 2427 (9th Cir.1967)(just cause standard is met “if a reasonable union memberwould be put to further inquiry. . . Irrespective of the nature of the asserted cause, the test mustbe whether reason would require substantiation.”); Gabauer v. Woodcock, 594 F.2d 662, 100LRRM 2808, 2811 (8th Cir. 1979)(relying on Allenand Morleyin finding just cause satisfied “ifa reasonable union member would be put to further inquiry”).See also Kinslowv. AmericanPostal Workers Union, Chicago, 222 F.3d 269, 274 & n. 2, 164 LRRM 3025, 3028 & n. 2 (7thCir.2000) (holding that “’just cause’ encompasses more than just a desire to confirm theinformation“ontheunion’sannualreport).

(Revised:Dec.2016)

275.006

In order to show good cause under section 201(c), the union member need only show thatthe size and nature of certain expenditures were such that a reasonably prudent member havingan interest in proper financial management of the union would naturally be put upon inquiry and,inthe course ofhis inquiry, has beendenied access tohisunion’srecords.
Coratellav.Roberto,56LRRM 2668 (D. Conn. 1964).

Note: This decision was rendered on a motion for summary judgment which was later setasideonthebasisthatsuchamotioncannotbegrantedwherethereisafactualquestion,i.e.,

a question as to “good cause.”56 LRRM 2668.

(TechnicalRevisions:Dec.2016)