Bill Dugan caught my eye when I read that his Maryland Buffalo Ranch and hunting store (I'm not making this up!) was raided by the FBI in May, 2008 and that he resigned as President of Local 150 in June, 2008, to "spend more time" with his critically ill wife. We wish her the best.
Searching a little further revels that Bill Dugan is a member of the Eastern Bison Association and indeed, owns:
Dugan’s Buffalo Farm
14223 Reel Road
Hancock, MD 21750
301-678-6288 Home
301-678-6162 Fax
14223 Reel Road
Hancock, MD 21750
301-678-6288 Home
301-678-6162 Fax
One might infer that Bill Dugan is running a captive hunt preserve, and it's reported that his office was decorated with stuffed trophies, but I'll make no judgment. If the mighty hunters want to shoot tame animals, who am I to say it's wrong - just don't call it a sport! Grizzly bears and Bowie knives, now that's what a real (wo)man would opt for.
It's also reported that his "farm" flies the Stars and Bars - perfectly acceptable but Bill, what kind of message does it send? Can a person of color visit you at your farm to watch the "buffalo roam"?
Say whatever you will about Bill Dugan, he was very effective at increasing the membership, revenue and power of Local 150 in his 22 years at the helm. He took Local 150 from a small, unknown to one of the most powerful IUOE unions in the country with a 2008 reported membership of 23,515 and receipts of almost $60 million. Whee, doggie - those are some big numbers.
It's also noted that he wasn't the typical frothing-at-the-mouth liberal idealog - he crossed the aisle as it suited his needs and at times drew the wrath, and a few perks, from both the right and left. He was appointed to the Illinois boards to oversee casino's, the CTA and the state's tollway system, by a REPUBLICAN governor!
His "retirement" was little reported but an article appeared in the Illinois Review on June 27th, 2008:
He was controversial - depending on the individual member point of view, he either a "lying, racist, scumbag thief" or he ought to be enshrined next to Mother Teresa when he passes. I know nothing except what I read but it is a fact that some members have been trying to deceritify Local 150 for many years. Sour grapes or legitimate complaints - who knows?
Life would not be complete without looking at Local 150's financial disclosure, so the 2007 and 2008 Lm-2's are posted on Union Disclosure Blog.
Bill was doing OK for himself at the end. He received a total of $175,423 (and I understand he has lifetime health and other benefits) from the union for the six months he was President in 2008. Certainly not the mega-bucks some CEO's have received for driving their companies into the dirt but I know many workers who'd take a third (perhaps 1/4) of Bill's 2008 union salary and think they'd done made their way to hog-heaven.
Everyone is invited to look at the unions disclosure and I'll close the post with a few comments taken off the 2008 LM-2:
Question 17: THE LOCAL IS A DEFENDANT IN SEVERAL LAWSUITS. IN ONE SUIT, THREE NON-UNION TESTING COMPANIES FILED A SUIT AGAINST THE UNION ALLEGING VIOLATION OF FEDERAL ANTITRUST LAWS AND VARIOUS STATE LAWS. THE UNION CONSIDERS THE CLAIMS BASELESS AND WITHOUT MERIT. THE PARTIES ARE NOW ENGAGED IN EXPERT DISCOVERY. THE PLAINTIFFS' EXPERT ESTIMATES THEIR DAMAGES AT $5 MILLION INCLUDING ATTORNEY'S FEES. THE LEGAL COUNSEL FILED A MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON JUNE 2, 2008. MEANWHILE, AFTER THE CASE WAS REASSIGNED TO A NEW JUDGE PLAINTIFFS SOUGHT ANOTHER PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AGAINST THE PICKETING. AS OF OCTOBER, 2008, THE UNION'S SUMMARY JUDGEMENT MOTION AND THE PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION HAVE BEEN FULLY BRIEFED AND LEGAL COUNSEL IS AWAITING A DECISION.
A SIGNATORY CONTRACTOR IS SEEKING AN UNDEFINED AMOUNT OF DAMAGES FOR ALEGED VIOLATIONS OF FIDUCIARY DUTIES AND RELATED VIOLATIONS. THE LOCAL CONSIDERS THESE ALLEGATIONS TO BE MERITLESS AND PLANS TO DEFEND AGAINST IT VIGOROUSLY. DISCOVERY CLOSED ON OCTOBER 17, 2008. CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT WERE FULLY BRIEFED BY JANUARY 20, 2009. IN THE EVENT THE COURT DENIES THE UNION'S MOTION, TRIAL IS SET FOR MAY 4, 2009.
ON JANUARY 21, 2008 THREE INDIVIDUALS FILED SEPARATE LAWSUITS AGAINST THE UNION. THE PLAINTIFFS RAISED CLAIMS FOR IMPROPER USE OF DRIVERS LICENSE INFORMATION LAWFULLY OBTAINED FROM THE ILLINOIS SECRETARY OF STATES OFFICE UNDER THE FEDERAL DRIVERS PRIVACY PROTECTION ACT. PLAINTIFFS SEEK MULTI-MILLION DOLLARS IN DAMAGES. THE UNION'S LEGAL COUNSEL HAS INITIATED DISCOVERY IN THE MATTER. BRIEFING ON PLAINTIFFS' MOTIONS FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION AND FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION WILL BE COMPLETED BY FEBRUARY 20, 2009.
ON JULY 24, 2008, A LAWSUIT WAS FILED AGAINST THE UNION IN FEDERAL COURT ALLEGING THAT THE UNION OFFICIALS ACCEPTED BRIBES TO SETTLE GRIEVANCES. THE UNION'S LEGAL COUNSEL INVESTIGATED AND FOUND THE CASE TO BE WITHOUT MERIT. A MOTION TO DISMISS WAS FILED ON DECEMBER 1, 2008. THE COURT RECENTLY EXTENDED THE DEADLINE FOR PLAINTIFFS RESPONSE TO FEBRUARY 13, 2009. THE UNION'S LEGAL COUNSEL'S MOTIONS SHOULD BE FULLY BRIEFED BY MARCH 6, 2009.
A SIGNATORY CONTRACTOR IS SEEKING AN UNDEFINED AMOUNT OF DAMAGES FOR ALEGED VIOLATIONS OF FIDUCIARY DUTIES AND RELATED VIOLATIONS. THE LOCAL CONSIDERS THESE ALLEGATIONS TO BE MERITLESS AND PLANS TO DEFEND AGAINST IT VIGOROUSLY. DISCOVERY CLOSED ON OCTOBER 17, 2008. CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGEMENT WERE FULLY BRIEFED BY JANUARY 20, 2009. IN THE EVENT THE COURT DENIES THE UNION'S MOTION, TRIAL IS SET FOR MAY 4, 2009.
ON JANUARY 21, 2008 THREE INDIVIDUALS FILED SEPARATE LAWSUITS AGAINST THE UNION. THE PLAINTIFFS RAISED CLAIMS FOR IMPROPER USE OF DRIVERS LICENSE INFORMATION LAWFULLY OBTAINED FROM THE ILLINOIS SECRETARY OF STATES OFFICE UNDER THE FEDERAL DRIVERS PRIVACY PROTECTION ACT. PLAINTIFFS SEEK MULTI-MILLION DOLLARS IN DAMAGES. THE UNION'S LEGAL COUNSEL HAS INITIATED DISCOVERY IN THE MATTER. BRIEFING ON PLAINTIFFS' MOTIONS FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION AND FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION WILL BE COMPLETED BY FEBRUARY 20, 2009.
ON JULY 24, 2008, A LAWSUIT WAS FILED AGAINST THE UNION IN FEDERAL COURT ALLEGING THAT THE UNION OFFICIALS ACCEPTED BRIBES TO SETTLE GRIEVANCES. THE UNION'S LEGAL COUNSEL INVESTIGATED AND FOUND THE CASE TO BE WITHOUT MERIT. A MOTION TO DISMISS WAS FILED ON DECEMBER 1, 2008. THE COURT RECENTLY EXTENDED THE DEADLINE FOR PLAINTIFFS RESPONSE TO FEBRUARY 13, 2009. THE UNION'S LEGAL COUNSEL'S MOTIONS SHOULD BE FULLY BRIEFED BY MARCH 6, 2009.
No comments:
Post a Comment