A jury trial in US District Court resulted in a verdict against the ILWU which ordered the union to pay $1.24 million in damages to Maui member Nicanor Casumpang, Jr. The ILWU is appealing the decision, but if the verdict and award are upheld, it could impact all 20,000 members of ILWU Local 142 in Hawaii.

“The money will have to come out of our general fund, which is the union dues paid by our members to carry on the work of their union,” said ILWU Secretary-Treasurer Guy Fujimura. “This is money we would otherwise use for servicing our members, for negotiating contracts, for education programs, and for organizing.”

“We were shocked by the verdict,” said ILWU President Fred Galdones. “The ILWU is a democratic union and we did everything the right way according to the union’s Constitution and Bylaws. It appears that the jury didn’t understand this and mistakenly thought it was a case of a little guy fighting against a big union.”

Casumpang is an ILWU member on Maui who sued the union and former ILWU Local 142 President Eusebio Lapenia, alleging the union retaliated against him for criticizing the union leadership. The suit revolved around events that occurred in 1996 and 1997. 

During the court case ILWU Local 142 argued that union members followed due process in disciplining an official who repeatedly violated the rules of his job by running his outside business while he was being paid full-time to serve the membership, even after he was warned and agreed to stop his contracting work.

In January 1998, ILWU Local 142 union members had found Casumpang guilty of violating union rules. He was suspended as a union member until June, 2005. Because that suspension has been completed, his membership has been reinstated.

“The ILWU is committed to protecting every member’s rights,” said Galdones. “In 2003 the members voted that we should uphold the discipline. The jury really has ruled against the members. Our focus now is on making sure that this jury verdict does not undermine the rights of the 20,000 other members represented by Local 142. We will work to make sure that the member’s resources are protected as well.” ◆

The Constitutional rule against outside employment

The ILWU Constitution holds full-time officials of the union to some of the highest standards of any organization. Officers of the union are duty-bound to be fully committed to the goals and programs of the union. It is a full-time job and requires full-time attention and commitment.

This is why under Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution, fulltime ILWU officials are prohibited from holding any gainful position outside of the union, unless authorized by the Local Executive Committee with the approval of the Local Executive Board. This and similar provisions have been part of the ILWU Constitution since 1951.

It is not in the best interest of ILWU members to allow their business agents to be actively engaged in their own private business at the same time they are being paid to work full-time for the union. Officers who cannot accept these conditions are free to resign. The ILWU Constitution is clear on this point — the union’s full-time officials are there to serve the union and its membership. The union is not there to serve the private objectives or gains of individual officers.

The discipline imposed on Nicanor Casumpang
Casumpang was on the payroll of ILWU Local 142 as a full-time official for a little less than five years — from February 3, 1993 to January 7, 1998. In January 1998, a Judicial Panel of union members, under the procedures outlined in the ILWU Constitution, disciplined Casumpang because they found that he engaged in willful and continuing violation of Article II, section 1 of the Constitution.

The panel, composed of five rankand-file ILWU members, found that Casumpang actively engaged in his electrical contracting business, from which he received substantial income, at the same time he was receiving full-time wages from the union and after he had already been warned and agreed to stop his contracting work. The panel also heard evidence that Casumpang conducted his business from the union office during working hours, took paid sick leave to do his contracting work, and concealed his improper activities by repeatedly withholding information requested by the union.

The Judicial Panel imposed two main penalties: 1) Casumpang was fined the sum of $7,636, which is the amount Casumpang reported receiving for his electrical contracting work after he had been warned and agreed to stop that work; and 2) Casumpang was suspended as a member in good standing until June 13, 2005. The suspension made Casumpang ineligible to run for or serve in the position of officer of ILWU Local 142 during the period of his suspension.

Casumpang sues the ILWU
In 1998 Casumpang sued the ILWU and then-President Eusebio “Bo” Lapenia in federal court. The court first found in favor of the ILWU and Casumpang appealed. When the case returned to the trial court after the appeal, the court ordered Casumpang to appeal the discipline to the ILWU membership as required by the Constitution. The union held membership meetings in August and September 2003. Casumpang failed to attend any meeting and the members voted to uphold the penalties imposed on him by the Judicial Pane.

In 2004, Casumpang renewed his lawsuit against the ILWU and Bo Lapenia, claiming the union and Mr. Lapenia retaliated against him in violation of his free speech rights by disciplining him. The trial was held May 3, 2005 to May 24, 2005 in US District Court of Honolulu. The jury found in favor of Casumpang on his claim against the union and ordered the ILWU to pay Casumpang $90,000 for injury to his reputation; $150,000 for emotional distress; and $1 million for punitive damage. The jury found Lapenia was not liable.

Response to the verdict
The current union leadership strongly disagrees with the verdict based on the evidence that was presented at the trial. “Casumpang was not disciplined for criticizing the union leadership,” Galdones explained. “The jury heard evidence that no other ILWU member has ever claimed he was retaliated against for speaking out, and that this union greatly respects the rights of its members to do so.

“The officers of the union were carrying out their duty to enforce the ILWU Constitution,” Galdones stated. “All democratic procedures required by the Constitution were followed. An independent Judicial Panel of the union imposed the penalties, which were upheld by the Local Executive Board and by the rank-and-file members.”

The union has requested the trial judge reverse the verdict on the grounds that the evidence before the jury did not support the verdict, or that, at least, the judge reduce the damages awarded to Casumpang. Decisions on these requests are expected sometime this summer. ◆