IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

 

 

 

VAL ALBERT and GALEN COOK,    

Plaintiffs,

 

vs.

 

LARRY JOHNSON,

Defendant.

 

No. C98-1180Z

 

 

DEPOSITION UPON ORAL EXAMINATION OF CLYDE WILSON

 

APPEARANCES:

 

PRO SE:

 

Mr. Galen Cook

33408 First Lane South

Suite C

Federal Way, WA 98003    

 

FOR THE DEFENDANT:

 

Mr. David Ballew

Attorney at Law

101 Elliott Avenue West

Suite 550

Seattle, WA 98119

 

ALSO PRESENT:

Russell Reid

Val Albert

 

REPORTER: Elizabeth McGee

#MC-GE-EE-T338KD

 

April 27, 1999

Seattle, Washington

 

 

Sandra Baker & Associates

Court Reporters and Legal Video Services

870 10th Lane,

Fox Island,

Washington 98333

 

 

 

 

I N D E X

 

EXAMINATION

 

 

Mr. Cook

Pages 4,23

 

Mr. Albert

Pages 92,10

 

EXHIBIT INDEX

 

EXHIBIT DESCRIPTION 

 

NO.1  Letter dated 11-1-96 to Mr. Cook by Mr. Jakubiec

PAGES 41,24

 

NO.2 Pages 60 and 61 of the Union Constitution

PAGES 43,17

 

NO.3 Complaint for Injunctive Relief; 5 pp.

PAGES 43,19

 

NO.4 Letter dated 11-4-96 to Mr. Albert by Mr. Jakubiec

PAGES 69,5

 

 

CLYDE WILSON BY MR. COOK

 

MR. COOK: I 'm not here to answer any more of your questions, Mr. Ballew.

 

MR. BALLEW: Well, if you don't -

 

MR. COOK: I'm here to take his deposition.

 

MR. BALLEW: -- have an answer for that, then I have to tell him not to answer.

 

MR. COOK: Okay. So do you want to end the deposition right now?

 

MR. BALLEW: I'm going to tell him not to answer. You go ahead and keep asking Q.uestions and if -

 

MR. COOK: Okay. That's fine.

 

MR. BALLEW: -- I'll pose my objections -

 

MR. COOK: That's fine.

 

MR. BALLEW: -- as I see fit.

 

MR. COOK: That's fine.

 

Q. (By Mr. Cook) Mr. Wilson, how many members are in Local 302 at this time?

 

A. Active members, retirees, beneficiaries?

 

Q. Let's break it down. How many active?

 

A. We're roughly -- and it changes from year to year. I would say, rounded numbers, about 5,000.

 

Q. About 5,000 current right now?

 

A. Yeah.

 

Q. And about how many retirees?

 

Page 18

 

 

CLYDE WILSON BY MR. COOK

 

A. I believe there's another 4,500 to 6,000.

 

Q. And do the retirees vote? Do they get to vote in union elections?

 

A. Yes.

 

Q. They do?

 

A. Um-hmm.

 

Q. And as the business manager, do you also sit on the trust?

 

A. Yes.

 

Q. And how many members are on the trust?

 

A. There's five from management and there's five from labor, ten.

 

Q. Could you name the ones on labor?

 

A. Yes. You have John Burnett out of Local 612.

 

Q. That's down in Tacoma?

 

A. Yes.

 

Q. okay.

 

A. You have Gordy Howins who's the business manager of 612, you have Jack Jakubiec out of 302, you have myself, Clyde Wilson out of 302, and you have Barry Riedesel who is out of 302.

 

Q. Mr. Riedesel sits in the trust too?

 

A. Yes.

 

Q. And how about Mr. Jonas, does he -

 

A. No.

 

Page 19

 

CLYDE WILSON BY MR. COOK

 

 

Q. -- sit on the trust?

 

A. No, he's been removed.

 

Q. And when was he removed?

 

A. Let -- and just for rounded times, say a month ago.

 

Q. So Mr. Riedesel just came into the trust then?

 

A. Yes.

 

Q. How often do you meet as a trust group?

 

A. Four times a year.

 

Q. In Seattle?

 

A. No. Our next trust meeting will be in Alaska.

 

Q. And do trustees receive pay for their work on the

 

trusts?

 

A. No.

 

Q. They do not?

 

A. No.

 

Q. Okay.

 

A. You're talking about management and labor or labor?

 

Q. Oh, I'm talking about labor, the labor trustees.

 

A. No, they are -- they're already on their -- the payroll

 

of their -- of their local unions.

 

Q. So there's no compensatory benefits then to the trustees on -

 

A. Only -_

 

Q. -- labor?

 

A. Only the cost of the hotel expense, the travel

 

Page 20

 

 

CLYDE WILSON BY MR. COOK

 

Q. Travel, okay.

 

A. -- expense, which is standard.

 

Q. And who are the principal managers that are funded to date? Can you name them without getting into detail or are there too many?

 

A. I'll do the best I can. We just added two. You have Columbia, you have Crabbe Huson, you have Rainier Investment, you have Washington Capital. There -there's two Washington Capitals, one is stocks and bonds and the other one is a real estate portfolio. You have principal -

 

Q. Can I interrupt you for a minute?

 

A. Okay.

 

Q. Does Mike Conlon -- is he a money manager on any of these trusts?

 

MR. BALLEW: Let me object on the -- this question is just beyond the scope of discovery. We've now had a chance yesterday to learn the extent of your claim and it has nothing to do with this.

 

When you were asked why you're asking information regarding Mr. Conlon, neither one of you had any idea, you had no theory, so I'm going to object. It's beyond the scope of discovery.

 

MR. COOK: I've got another question. We'll move on to another question.

 

Page 21

 

CLYDE WILSON BY MR. COOK

 

Q. (By Mr. Cook) Did you know that Val Albert fired Mike Conlon in the late 80's when Mr. Albert became business manager?

 

A. When Val Albert took over -

 

Q. Yes.

 

A. -- as business manager?

 

Q. Yes.

 

A. He fired everybody, including me.

 

Q. Okay. So he did fire Mike Conlon too?

 

A. Yeah, everybody.

 

Q. Were you employed with the local before Mr. Albert -

 

A. Yes.

 

Q. -- came on? What was your capacity?

 

A. I was a dispatcher.

 

Q. And you were terminated when Mr Albert became business manager?

 

A. Yes.

 

Q. Did he personally fire you?

 

A. It came down through the business manager at that time that everybody would be terminated.

 

Q. So Val personally never came up and fired you then?

 

A. No. I offered my services to stay to help the next dispatcher, but they refused.

 

Q. And who did you offer those services to? I believe Val and the dispatcher that came in at that

 

Page 22

 

CLYDE WILSON BY MR. COOK

 

time was Jack McGladry I think was the first one. I told them I would help out.

 

Q. Now, in 1990 there was a special election for officers; is that correct?

 

A. Yes.

 

Q. And this was -- I believe Larry Johnson was running for business manager at that time?

 

A. Yes.

 

Q. And were you on his slate as a candidate?

 

A. Yes.

 

Q. What position were you running for?

 

A. President.

 

Q. Did Mr. Johnson invite you on his slate or did you approach him?

 

A. He invited me on the slate.

 

Q. Did he ask for any money of any kind to help with the campaign costs, brochures, stuff like that?

 

A. I was -- no.

 

Q. He didn't, okay. And can you tell me who else the line officers were in that slate?

 

A. On that slate?

 

Q. Yes, the 1990 slate.

 

A. Oh, yes, I can. You had Larry Johnson, business manager; the financial secretary was Charlie Barton; president, myself, was Clyde Wilson; you had -- and I

 

Page 23

 

CLYDE WILSON BY MR. COOK

 

believe at that time Jerome Hanson

 

Q. Those are the principal -

 

A. -- was the vice president.

 

Q. Okay.

 

A. But I cannot remember who treasurer was at that time. I don't know if it was Dale Reid out of -- out of Juneau or -- it was one of the Alaska candidates. I can't remember.

 

Q. Was it a full slate; do you remember? Did it cover most of the seats that were up? Was Johnson's slate complete?

 

A. No. No.

 

Q. Is Larry a good friend of yours back then in 1990?

 

A. No. No. I wouldn't say a social friend, no.

 

Q. So when you wanted to run for president, this was something that you voluntarily wanted to do then? You wanted to run for president?

 

A. We had -- we had worked together the previous year. You got to understand that we worked together for three years. When Larry Johnson was on the executive board - no, I take that back. Larry was -- when he was an agent, I was a dispatcher. That's how we got to know each other.

 

Q. So you

 

A. So we worked together.

 

Page 24

 

CLYDE WILSON BY MR. COOK

 

Q. I see. So you were acquaintances or friends or professional work partners?

 

A. We were work partners.

 

Q. Okay. And of course in 1990 you're -- excuse me, Larry Johnson's slate won; is that correct?

 

A. Yes.

 

Q. And you became the president of the local in 1990.

 

A. Yes.

 

Q. And how about in 1993? There was an election in 1993 too.

 

A. Um-hmm.

 

MR. BALLEW: You know, I'm going object to this background information in terms of -- unless, as I asked before, if you can provide some indication of how this has relevance or can lead to discovery of admissible evidence to your claim, and you've yet to do that.

 

MR. COOK: Factual background information. What's wrong with probing for that?

 

MR. BALLEW: Well, I'm just trying to figure out the relevance of all this.

 

MR. COOK: Factual background.

 

MR. BALLEW: Well, -

 

MR. COOK: So you don't want me to ask him about –

 

Page 25

 

was taken to expel Mr. Albert?

 

MR. BALLEW: Let me pose an objection first in that it's an improper question seeking an opinion from this witness. It's based on speculation and mischaracterization of testimony.

 

MR. COOK: Can he answer the question?

 

MR. BALLEW: With those objections, yes.

 

MR. COOK: Okay.

 

Q. (By Mr. Cook) Mr. Wilson, you can answer the question.

 

MR. BALLEW: Understand that this is just a hypothetical. He's already testified he has no idea when Exhibit 1 was prepared or sent out.

 

MR. COOK: Well, I told him before I even asked the question that I was asking for his opinion. I made that clear.

 

MR. BALLEW: Yes. And now I'm making the record clear as well.

 

MR. COOK: It was on the record when I asked it.

 

Q. (By Mr. Cook) But go ahead, Mr. Wilson, you can answer the question.

 

A. Can you repeat the question, please.

 

Q. Yes. In your opinion do you find it strange that a person on honorary withdrawal status was found to have violated a section of the constitution, and that the

 

Page 66

 

 

document stating that was prepared hours before Mr. Albert's expulsion trial?

 

MR. BALLEW: Same objection.

 

Q.(By Mr. Cook) You can answer the question.

 

A. I -- I don't recall. I don't -- I -- I don't see the point of view. To me you're mixing two cases.

 

Q. You want me to rephrase and make it -

 

MR. BALLEW: Let him -

 

Q. (By Mr. Cook) -- clear?

 

MR. BALLEW: -- finish his -- let him finish his answer.

 

A. You've -- you're -- you're mixing what Val Albert had nothing to do with what -- I -- my opinion was if there was violations of your -- of a person before the trial, I could see that this -- this could have been -- fallen into place.

 

Q. (By Mr. Cook) Well, what was the violation?

 

MR. BALLEW: Well, let me object that the document -- Exhibit 1 speaks for itself.

 

Q. (By Mr. Cook) Noting the objection, can you answer that?

 

A. No.

 

Q. So you don't know what the violation was?

 

MR. BALLEW: Let me object. He's already testified he doesn't recall the circumstances

 

Page 67

 

surrounding this, not that he didn’t know. He just doesn't recall. He knew at the time.

 

Q. (By Mr. Cook) Mr. Wilson, do you remember what charge against Mr. Albert led to his expulsion?

 

A. No, I don't. There was -- I believe there was three.

 

Q. Well, can you name the charges?

 

A. One of them, I believe, he went public with union business. The second was that he used a nonmember as a campaign manager and -- which would fall under in-kind service. The third -- and I -- and I don't recall what -- what the third one was.

 

Q. Could it have possibly been the fact that a suit was brought against the union?

 

A. Yes.

 

Q. In fact, was it that a suit was brought against the union?

 

A. Yeah, and he didn't use all the remedies or internal remedies.

 

Q. So you know about that suit then; is that correct?

 

A. I know of parts, not all.

 

Q. But do you know that that suit subsequently led to Mr. Albert's expulsion?

 

MR. BALLEW: Let me object. You've asked him to identify the charges when he wasn't able to recall what charge led to the expulsion, I believe. He has not

 

Page 68

 

testified regarding which of those charges -- or if he recalls which of those charges actually led to his expulsion or his fine or other penalty.

 

MR. COOK: Objection noted.

 

Q. (By Mr. Cook) Through your counsel I'd like to give you Exhibit No. 4, and I'll provide one for the court reporter.

 

MR. COOK: At this time we'd like to go off record.

 

(Pause in proceedings)

 

(Deposition Exhibit No. 4 marked for identification.)

 

MR. COOK: We're ready to go back on record. We're still talking to Clyde Wilson.

 

Q. (By Mr. Cook) Mr. Wilson, have you had a chance to review Exhibit No. 4?

 

A. Yes.

 

Q. And would you please read Exhibit No. 4 and give the date that it was sent and to who it was sent.

 

A. November 4th, 1996, Val Albert, address of Redmond, "Dear Mr. Albert: On" -

 

MR. BALLEW: Do you want him to read the entire letter? I think the exhibit speaks for itself.

 

MR. COOK: I would like him to read the entire letter, yes.

 

Page 69

 

 

MR. BALLEW: On what basis? I think it's now just kind of -

 

MR. COOK: I think there's enough information on that letter to provide the foundation for the continuance of this deposition.

 

MR. BALLEW: Well, just in terms of having him review it and certify that he's reviewed it, -

 

MR. COOK: You want to make an objection on the record?

 

MR. BALLEW: Yes. It's like a dog and pony show to make the witness read a letter of that length into the record.

 

MR. COOK: MR. BALLEW, it's one -- it's three little paragraphs here. You had, at yesterday's deposition, us reading more than that.

 

MR. BALLEW: Did I?

 

MR. COOK: Yes. So do you still want to object?

 

MR. BALLEW: I'll make my -- I'll let him read it, but I think -

 

MR. COOK: Thank you.

Q. (By MR. COOK) Mr. Wilson, --

 

MR. BALLEW: -- at this point it's inappropriate.

 

MR. COOK: That's fine. Your objection is

 

Page 70

 

noted.

 

Q. (By Mr. Cook) Mr. Wilson, go ahead and continue where you left off.

 

A. "On November 1, 1996, a trial was held in District 1, Bothell, Washington concerning -- concerning charges brought against you by Brother Barry Riedesel for violation of Article XXIV, Subdivision 1, Section (e) Election of Officers of the Constitution of the International Union of Operating Engineers and Article XIV, Section l(g), election -- Elections of the Bylaws of the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 302."

 

"I am informing you that you were found guilty by your fellow Brothers and Sisters: 65 guilty, 19 not guilty, for violations of Article XXIV, Subdivision 1, Section (e), Election of Officers of the Constitution of International Union of Operating Engineers," et cetera, "the Elections of the Bylaws of the International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 302, therefore" - -

 

(Clarification interruption by reporter)

 

A. -- "therefore the Union imposes the penalty of expulsion."

 

"Please be advised that you may appeal this fine to the General Executive Board within 30 days from November

 

Page 71

 

1, 1996, pursuant to Article XXIV, Section l(a) Appeals," signed Jack Jakubiec.

 

Q. Thank you. Now, is this a copy of the actual document that notified Mr. Albert that he was expelled from the union?

 

A. Is this a copy?

 

Q. It's not the actual, but is it a copy of the letter that was sent to him?

 

A. I would assume so.

 

Q. Okay. Good. Now, going back up to the third paragraph of the document you just read, -

 

A. Um-hmm.

 

Q. -- it says, "Article XXIV, Subdivision 1, Section" -- is it e? -- Section (e), Election of Officers" -- I'm sorry, I stand corrected. I -- strike that question, please.

 

Look on the third paragraph. There's a short paragraph in the middle and then where it starts "for violation." Yeah.

 

A. For violation.

 

Q. Yes, "for violation of Article XXIV, Subdivision 1, Section (e), Election of Officers of the Constitution of IUOE, Article XIV," -

 

A. -- XIV.

 

Q. “Section l(g)." Okay. Do you happen to know what

 

Page 72

 

 

that violation stands for, what it was that he violated that brought that charge that led to his expulsion?

 

A. Not -- not without reading the documents. I mean,

 

Q. Do you want to consult with your union constitution?

 

MR. BALLEW: Are you asking him what facts led to it -

 

MR. COOK: No.

 

MR. BALLEW: -- or what the constitution provides?

 

MR. COOK: No. I just want to know what the violation was that led to the -

 

MR. BALLEW: So the facts of the violation?

 

MR. COOK: I just want to know what the charge was and what he actually violated, what it -- what was it that he did that led to his expulsion?

 

MR. BALLEW: Now, let me object -

 

MR. COOK: Okay.

 

MR. BALLEW: -- in terms of I'm not sure now where you're going with it. To the extent you're asking about Mr. Albert's Title 1 claim, I think we've covered that had ground already.

 

If you're trying to tie this in with the cancellation withdrawal card, you've lost me. And I'm not clear with the witness, when you ask him if he wants to consult with his union constitution, if you're asking

 

Page 73

 

 

 

Q. okay.

 

MR. COOK: Okay. Off the record for a minute. (Pause in proceedings)

 

MR. COOK: Back on the record. At this time Mr. Albert's going to ask some questions. And we won't use the Ping-Pong method because Mr. Reid has already informed us he doesn't like that method.

 

 

 

EXAMINATION

 

BY MR. ALBERT:

 

Q. Mr. Wilson, did you have knowledge of Mr. Cook's membership cancellation prior to my expulsion in 1996?

 

A. Did I -- would you repeat the question.

 

Q. Did you have personal knowledge of Mr. Cook's membership cancellation prior my expulsion in 1996?

 

A. I don't recall.

 

Q. Mr. Wilson, -

 

MR. BALLEW: I don't mean to pose an early objection, but can I have that question read back.

 

(Court reporter read back last question)

 

MR. BALLEW: All right. Let me just object to the form of question, that it refers to Mr. Cook’s membership cancellation when the record establishes a withdrawal card cancellation. 

 

Q. (By Mr. Albert) Mr. Wilson, did you have knowledge of

 

Page 92

 

 

an honorary membership of Mr. Galen Cook's prior to the expulsion of 1996?

 

MR. BALLEW: I'm going object to the form of the question in terms of honorary membership is vague and ambiguous and is -- especially in line of the testimony that's occurred.

 

I'm going to object that in terms of after each question, then Mr. Cook then writes down something and whispers it in Mr. Albert's ear, -

 

MR. ALBERT: I understand.

 

MR. BALLEW: Hang on. Let me just make my record, sir. -- that this is the same as Mr. Cook asking the questions himself.

 

Q. (By Mr. Albert) Mr. Wilson, why didn't you allow me to read my defense statement during my trial of 1996?

 

A. Val, you were allowed to read your depo- -- your prearranged statement. But the statement that you had -- as you recall, there was three defined charges. And before we ever got started, we read the charges.

 

If you had a prearranged statements, one, two, three or three, two, one or five -- whatever it was. I gave you every opportunity to read your statement, Val.

 

Q. All right. Next question: As the president of that trial, why didn’t you control Mr. Jack Jakubiec shouting out at me during the meeting?

 

Page 93

 

 

 

MR. BALLEW: I'll object to the form of the question. You can answer now.

 

A. I don't believe that Jack Jakubiec did anything irregular. Could -- could you define what he was yelling out? I don't know.

 

Q. (By Mr. Albert) I believe he was yelling out that I would give my papers, my defense papers, to the union. And I was also ordered by Mr. Jack Jakubiec to answer the questions.

 

And you’re the president, Mr. Wilson. You conduct the meeting.

 

A. Yes. But do you recall how the meetings are held? We're going get into a question and answer thing here real quick,

 

MR. COOK: Don't -- don't look at me.

 

A. -- Val. The procedures is the president -- you're absolutely right, the president oversees the meeting. But he -- all he is is oversees the meeting ok. He hands then over to the financial secretary the reading of whatever the charges may be. They are then there for your observation -- there for your use and there for whatever you had to use.

 

The -- those stipulations were -- in other words, when you came back with your readings -- and I -- and I can remember directly asking you to stick directly to

 

Page 94

 

what those charges were. But whatever -- who -whatever the language you had prepared had nothing to do with the charges at that time. 

 

MR. BALLEW: I'm going to continue to object to Mr. Cook then leaning in and whispering questions to Mr. Albert.

 

MR. ALBERT: You have a right, Counselor, to confer with counsel, so . . .

 

Q. (By Mr. Albert) Mr. Wilson, I would like to ask you why were the charges reversed?

 

A. I don’t recall that -- that there's anywhere where it has to be one, two, or three or three, two or one. Again, when the charges were read, if you had a predesigned statement and this was a statement for number one and this is a statement for number two or statement number three, if we’d have taken three first or two first or one first, there would have been no objection to, you know, the material that you were reading.

 

The objection at the time was none of the -- none of the language that you were using fell in line with the -- the -- the suit -- or not the suit, but the charges that were filed. And as you recall, Val, I -I -- I went beyond -- you know, you -- you and I made eye contact and talked about it to try to get you back.

 

Page 95

 

And -- and -- and with -- Jack Jakubiec has all the right to say stick -- and I believe the comments were made to stick to the information and to the form. 

 

Now, to answer you, there was -- because you got a couple questions. They're all wrapped in one. It is standard procedures, just as we're doing here, if you have information, all we wanted was a copy of that information. I've got copies of -- here that Galen Cook had gave me.

 

So when we had this trial, everything that you had and we -- is -- is your personal paperwork, okay. A11 we were asking was for a copy of that for the records. That's all we were after. In fact, there was a duplicating machine, as I recall, in the building at that time. So all you had to do was duplicate them and then give it to -- for us for a record.

 

Q. Who did I give those papers to?

 

A. I don't recall. I believe that -- that you -- because you left shortly after that.

 

Q. Did I leave before I gave the papers or did I leave afterwards?

 

A. I believe that -- the best of my knowledge that -- that I know you went to the back section, left-hand side, my left-hand side. It would have been your right-hand side. I -- I don't recall.

 

Page 96

 

Q. All right. Mr. Wilson, did you have a right to the copy of the charges -- of my answer to the charges?

 

MR. BALLEW: Let me object to the form of the question. It's been asked and answered. If you want to reexplain it . . .

 

Q. (By Mr. Albert) Mr. Wilson, who hired Barry Riedesel?

 

A.  I did.

 

Q. When?

 

A.  What time?

 

Q. Yes. What's the time frame?

 

A.  I believe it was nine months, ten months. It was in May.

 

Q. Of the following year?

 

A.  Yeah. Yes.

 

Q. Mr. Wilson, why did Larry Johnson retire?

 

A.  You'll have to ask Larry Johnson. I believe Larry had 33, 35 years and some 20 years on staff and felt that it was time to move on, and that's what he did.

 

Q. Was he forced out, Mr. Wilson?

 

MR. BALLEW: Objection; asked and answered.

 

Q. (By Mr. Albert) Was he -

 

MR. BALLEW: He's already testified that it's -

 

MR. ALBERT: That's the question.

 

Q. (By Mr. Albert) The question is was Mr. Larry Johnson

 

Page 97

 

forced out?

 

A. You'll have to ask Larry Johnson. He -- he moved on in his own time.

 

Q. Okay. Mr. Wilson, I'd like to know why didn't Jack Jakubiec become the business manager since he was the financial recording secretary at the time. And -

 

MR. BALLEW: Let me -

 

Q. (By Mr. Albert) And -

 

MR. BALLEW: Let me pose an objection.

 

Q. (By Mr. Albert) -- the second part of that question -

 

MR. BALLEW: Well, hang on. I can object to a compound question as well, but I'm going to object to the grounds of relevance to any claim that's pending in this action as to speculation about Jack Jakubiec coming into position.

 

MR. ALBERT: Well, I'm trying to establish a foundation as to the protocol of who takes over when a former sitting business manager leaves.

 

MR. BALLEW: Well, that's not what your question asked. You asked about -

 

MR. ALBERT: Well, I -

 

MR. BALLEW: -- personal information -- Hang on. I need to make my record, okay. You're asking about why a particular individual was not selected, and that has no relevance in this lawsuit and cannot lead to

 

Page 98

 

the discovery of admissible evidence.

 

And that's what I'm talking about, that this lawsuit is not a vehicle to just fish around for information for future elections or whatever political purposes you may have.

 

MR. ALBERT: All right. Your objection is noted.

 

Q. (By Mr. Albert) Mr. Wilson, did you have any personal knowledge of Mr. Cook's membership cancellation prior to my expulsion?

 

MR. BALLEW: I'm just going to object. It's the third time this question has been asked. And if you want to answer it again the same way, then -

 

Q. (By Mr. Albert) Answer it again, Mr. Wilson, yes or no.

 

A. I don't recall.

 

Q. Did you, Mr. Wilson, talk to the business manager, Larry Johnson, about my expulsion of November '96 -- November, 1st, '96, before the meeting of that date or after?

 

MR. BALLEW: I'm going object to the compound question.

 

MR. ALBERT: It's a question.

 

MR. BALLEW: Yes, it's an improper question. It's a compound question.

 

Q. (By Mr. Albert) Next question: Mr. Wilson, was Barry Riedesel talked to before my expulsion since you were

 

Page 99

 

 

the president at that time, or by business manager Larry Johnson?

 

MR. BALLEW: Okay. Now I have to object in terms of that question -- the form of that question and it's vague. Did you talk to an individual period? It covers since the beginning of time basically the way that question is asked.

 

And then it's a compound question because now you also asked about Larry Johnson and whether or not Larry Johnson had a conversation with somebody who's not this witness. It calls for speculation.

 

Q. (By Mr. Albert) Mr. Wilson, did you have any communication with Mr. Barry Riedesel during the campaign period of 1996?

 

A. No.

 

Q. As president and business manager of Local 302, did you know if Mr. Albert's membership was in good standing for the last 40 years as a member?

 

A. Yes.

 

Q. Then, Mr. Wilson, how is it that you, a former business president of Local 302 and a sitting business manager, now can throw a former business manager of 40 years and a member out of his own local union, 302?

 

MR. BALLEW: Let me object to the form of that question, that it calls for speculation. There's no

 

Page 100

 

foundation that this gentleman voted on the expulsion or had anything in that regard. So I need to point that out because it assumes that this witness did that, and you haven't established any kind of foundation as to whether this witness was one person or whether he was part of the voting population at all.

 

MR. ALBERT: This witness was the president.

 

MR. BALLEW: Right, and we've already established what a president does. And now you've asked a question that assumes that this witness made a decision to expel you. And what I'm saying is there's nothing in the record that establishes that.

 

Q. (By Mr. Albert) Mr. Wilson, did you vote?

 

A. No, absolutely not, and neither did any of the staff. I made that very clear at the meeting that no staff voted on any -- any of the three charges.

 

Q. Any communication, Mr. Wilson, with Mr. Barry Riedesel just before that final night of Val Albert's expulsion?

 

A. I have no recall.

 

MR. ALBERT: We want to take a break here.

 

MR. COOK: Off the record. We'd like a five minute break here.

 

MR. BALLEW: Okay.

 

(Brief recess taken)

 

MR. ALBERT: On the record.

 

Page 101

Q. (By Mr. Albert) Mr. Wilson, did Mike Jonas hire Barry Riedesel?

 

A. Only through my direction. As you know, the business manager, they -- the business manager hires and fires and promotes and demotes people.

 

Q. That's correct. Then why would you ask Mr. Mike Jonas to hire Barry Riedesel?

 

A. It was under discussion at the time. And Mike Jonas took over my position when I became business manager, he then became at that time vice president, and he also was in charge of Washington operations as far as agents and the problems in the field and et cetera, exactly what I had when I worked under Business Manager Johnson. And I directed him to bring him in at that time.

 

Q. Mr. Wilson, what does "union brother" mean to you?

 

A. It means a way of life, it means a way of sharing, it means a way of responsibilities to one another, a member that's male or female; help those who need help, protect our rights as labor, protect our benefits, health and welfare, our constitution and bylaws, protect our well-being as a union.

 

Q. Mr. Wilson, does it mean expelling a brother member?

 

MR. BALLEW: Let me object to the form of that question. I'm objecting to the form in terms of the way you've asked it. It assumes that you have some rights

 

Page 102

beyond the order in the constitution and the federal law, so it's -

 

MR. ALBERT: Your objection is noted.

 

Q. (By Mr. Albert) Answer yes or no, Mr. Wilson.

 

MR. BALLEW: Well, no, no, no. You cannot tell my client how to answer the question. If he has an answer to the question, a proper question, he'll give it.

 

Q. (By Mr. Albert) Mr. Wilson, the question is: What does it mean to be a brother member in good standing and then be expelled from your union?

 

A. Is that a -

 

MR. BALLEW: Hang on, I'm going to object. It's a compound question.

 

MR. ALBERT: All right.

 

MR. BALLEW: It's -

 

Q. (By Mr. Albert) The question I asked prior to that question is: Does it mean expelling another brother?

 

MR. BALLEW: Well, I don't mean to keep interrupting, but I need to object because that's an ambiguous question. I'm not sure what you're asking. Does what mean expelling?

 

MR. ALBERT: We're trying to establish, and I think it's on the record, that I was a member in good standing.

 

Page 103

 

MR. BALLEW: Correct.

 

MR. ALBERT: My question to Mr. Wilson is: Does it mean expelling another member.

 

MR. BALLEW: Does the fact that you were a member in good standing mean expelling another member?

 

MR. ALBERT: No, expelling a member that was in good standing.

 

MR. BALLEW: Well, again, same objection, because I simply don't understand the question, so -vague, ambiguous.

 

MR. ALBERT: Okay. All right. I'll move on. Okay. Go ahead. I'll -

 

MR. COOK: Back over to me. Okay. It's on record that this deposition of Clyde Wilson will end now.

 

And if it's okay with counsel, we'd also like to cancel tomorrow's deposition with Mr. Johnson.

 

MR. BALLEW: That'll be fine.

 

MR. COOK: Okay. And we're done.

 

MR. BALLEW: Okay.

 

MR. COOK: Thank you. We'll give you notice later on a reschedule.

 

MR. BALLEW: Sure.

 

(Concluded at 12:00 p.m.)

 

(Signature reserved)

 

Page 104

 

I, CLYDE WILSON, hereby certify that I have read the foregoing deposition and that, to the best of my knowledge, said deposition is true and accurate (with the exception of the following corrections listed below):

 

PAGE LINE CORRECTION

 

S/ Clyde Wilson

DEPONENT’S SIGNATURE

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me the 27th day of May, 1999

 

 

 

S/ ____________

 

Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at________

 

Sandra Baker & Associates (253)272-9288

 

 

INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS #4

 

BRANCHES A, B, C, D, RA & O

LOCAL 302 AFL-CIO

 

Larry B. Johnson

Business Manager

 

 

Jack Jakubiec, Financial Secretary

Clyde J. Wilson, President

 

18701 120th Avenue N.E.

Bothell, Washington 98011-9514

Telephone:(206)806-0302

Fax: (206)806-0030

 

November 4, 1996

 

Val Albert

17771 NE 90th St #H242   

Redmond WA 98052

 

Certified #P 383 731 933

and Regular    Mail

 

Dear Mr. Albert:

 

On November 1, 1996 a trial was held in District 1, Bothell, WA concerning charges brought against you by Brother Barry Riedesel for violation of Article XXIV, Subdivision 1, Section (e) Election of Officers of the Constitution of the International Union of Operating Engineers and Article XIV, Section 1(g) Elections of the Bylaws of the International Union of Operating Engineers Local 302.

 

I am informing you that you were found guilty by your fellow Brothers and Sisters:

 

65 guilty

19 not guilty

 

for violation of Article XXIV, Subdivision 1, Section (e), Election of Officers of the Constitution of the International Union of Operating Engineers and Article XIV, Section 1 (g), Elections of the Bylaws of the International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 302, therefore, the Union imposes the penalty of expulsion.

 

Please be advised that you may appeal this fine to the General Executive Board within 30 days from November 1, 1996 pursuant to Article XVII, section 1(a), Appeals.

 

Sincerely,

 

S/Jack Jakubiec

Jack Jakubiec

Financial Secretary

 

 

Clyde Wilson

DEP EXHIBIT 4

DATE 4-27-99

ELIZABETH T. McGEE

NOTARY PUBLIC

 

 


Return to Laborers.org

(c) All orginal work Copyright Laborers.org 1998. All rights reserved..