Olms interpretative Manual

DETERMINGEXISTENCEOFTRUSTEESHIP

305.005SUSPENSIONOF CHARTER

Where the charter of a local labor organization is suspended by the parent organizationaccording to the constitution of the parent organization and where the funds, records, and otherproperty of the local are impounded by a court as a result of a dispute between the parent and thelocal over the suspension, those facts are sufficient to constitute a trusteeship so as to require atrusteeshipreport bythe parent organization.

305.100SUSPENSION OFAUTONOMYMAYBE COMPLETEOR PARTIAL

Asuspensionofautonomyimposedon asubordinatelabororganizationbya superiororganization is a trusteeship.The suspension of autonomy may be either complete or partial.Thus, a local is under trusteeship if one of its functions (e.g., control of financial affairs) issuspended,notwithstanding its retention of autonomy inother functions.

Seealso ManualEntry 235.005.

305.105SUPERVISION OF LOCAL

Four members of a local union filed a complaint with the Secretary of Labor under theprovisions of Title IV of LMRDA charging that an officer of the international union refused topermitthemtobe seatedasofficers oftheirlocalafter theyhadbeen dulyelectedbecause theywouldnot sign a pledgeof loyalty tothe union.On investigation it was found thatthe

international president had placed this local under his “direction, control and supervision” becauseof a movement within the ranks of the local to secede from the parent international and form anindependentunion. Thiscondition was in effect atthetimeof the electionand therefusal to seat.

Such supervision and control, including the international officer’s demand that thecomplainants sign a loyalty pledge and his refusal to seat them when they would not, wasdeterminedbythe Departmenttohaveconstitutedasuspensionoftheautonomyotherwiseavailabletothis local under its constitutionand bylaws.

Thissuspensionofautonomywasfoundto haveconstitutedatrusteeshipwithinthemeaningof TitleIII of LMRDA.

305.200RECEIVERSHIPNOTTRUSTEESHIP

TheappointmentofareceiverbyaStateCourtisnota“trusteeship” withinthemeaningofLMRDA because the local’s autonomy is suspended by operation of State law and not by a labororganization.

Millsv. Collier,56 LRRM 2894(S.D. Ind. 1964).

(TechnicalRevisions:Dec. 2016)

305.300MINORITYFACTION

The trusteeship provisions of the Act relate only to assumption of control by one labororganization over its separately organized subordinate labor organizations.In the absence ofintervention by a superior labor organization, Title III does not affect in any way the principle ofmajority rule within a subordinate local union and therefore a minority faction within a singlelabor organization could not be considered as being under trusteeship because of domination andcontrolexercised bythe majority.

305.400FOREIGNLOCALS

The provisions of the Act with respect to imposition of trusteeships are applicable toUnited State national or international labor organizations subject to this Act even though theactionof theUnited States organization istakenwith respectto a foreignlocal.

29CFR 451.6(c).

*305.500“SUBORDINATEBODY”MEANSSUBORDINATELABORORGANIZATION

While the definition of a trusteeship in section 3(h) of the LMRDA refers to a labororganization’ssuspensionoftheautonomyotherwiseavailabletoa“subordinatebody”underitsconstitutionand bylaws,multiplecourtsof appealhave interpreted“subordinate body”to be

synonymous with “subordinate labor organization” in this instance.Therefore, a trusteeship is notcovered by the Act unless it is imposed over a body that meets the definition of a labororganizationin section 3(i) of the Act.


See, e.g., New Jersey County and Municipal Council No. 61v. American Federation of State,County & Municipal Employees, 478 F.2d 1156, 1160 (3d Cir. 1973); Colorado Labor Councilv.American Federation of Labor & Congress of Industrial Organizations, 481 F.2d 396, 399 (10thCir. 1973).

(Revised:Dec.2016)