ATU Local 1001 - Who Are you Lying to Now?

The devil is in the details but first:

A warm hello to my buddies at ATU Local 1001 in Westminster, Colorado. Wishing Holman, Howard, Julio, Rudy, and especially lawyer Jones, a wonderful day!

I suspect that I'm just not smart enough to understand but perhaps one of the officers or members can explain it to me (or perhaps the members would like an explanation).

I look at the Local 1001 2008 LM-2 and I can see that the union had 2,163 members and that the members paid $1,002,649 in dues for 2008. I trust and believe the LM-2 (no union has ever lied) and understand so far.

I get confused when I look at the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment Order, dated February 24th, 2009 and see the following under Finding of Fact:

3. RTD employs approximately 2,520 employees, about 1,907 of which are represented by ATU

Bear with me, here's part of my confusion: If 1,907 of the members are RTD employees, that only leaves 256 employed by First Transit, Laidlaw and Veolia. The numbers seem a little odd but I'm getting old and perhaps senile - that could be the answer.

It really blows my mind when I go to the Local 1001 "official" website and learn:

It (RTD) has more than 1,000 buses in its fleet, leasing about 400 to private carriers, and in 2006 had an annual operating budget of $393,228,967.

400 buses and 256 drivers? Geez, had I known that, I'd have asked to take mine home every night and not had to drive into Longmont every day. Think how much money and wear & tear I'd have saved.

Finally, I decided to check with RTD and came up with another set of numbers:

Buses owned and operated by RTD - 621

Owned by RTD & leased to subcontractors - 439

Budgeted number of employees - 2526

Salaried employees - 623

Represented employees - 1903 (amazing, numbers that match!)

Subcontractor employees - 1,593

To be fair, not all of those 1,593 are represented by ATU Local 1001 but the number is a hell of a lot higher than the 256 claimed on the 2008 LM-2. I'd suggest the "I'm Stupid & Incompetent" defense if this issue ever comes up (as it may, refer to LM-2 False or Misleading statements), it's worked before.