Case 1:90-cv-05722-RMB -THK Document 1039 Filed 03/03/11 Page 1 of 2

DeCARLO MEMO ENDORSEn--&e-"-f!-~-'-brt-""'-'''t-tv-~-''H---r". .

CONNOR
t­ "" elM' i$ SIlI,UI\IS(IIft

SHA
ATTORNE
~ n ~
w lI0
D .
4id'tfl ..
riM"
~t
h·"'"II! At
A
GlW"',,"
Oft !-
MAR 022011 10'.". q.M·
CHAMBERS Of'
RICHARD M. BERMAN
U.S.D.J.
March I, 2 ISO ORDERED:
Date: 313m
Honorable Richard M. Berman Rkbard M. Berm.... U.s.D.J.
United States District Court Judge
United States District Court, Southern District of New York
500 Pearl Street
New York, New York 10007

RE: United States v. District Council. et al.• Case No. I :90-cv·05722·RMB

Dear Judge Bennan:

This finn represents the New York City District Council of Carpenters ("District
Council") in the above-captioned case. I write on the District Council's behalfto request
clarification of a ruling issued by the Court dated May 26, 2009, entitled "Final Order and
Judgment of Contempt and Remedy" ("Order"). (Document #961)

The District Council and the Association of Wall-Ceiling and Carpentry Industries of
New York, Inc. ("Association") are parties to a collective bargaining agreement. The District
Council and the Association have differing views as to the application of a portion of the Order.
Specifically, the Order reads, in part, as follows:

3. In order to remediate the contempt found herein, the following remedies shall be
implemented:
a. The current Request System. under which contractors may make unlimited
requests for particular union carpenters, by name, from the Out of Work List, is
abolished. All provisions implementing or related to the implementation of the Request
System in collective bargaining agreements between the District Council and contractors
employing carpenters represented by the District Council are hereby declared null and
void. ... .
b. The selection, hiring or referral of carpenters at a particular jobsite will
take place in accordance with the following provisions of this Order:

(iv.) The percentage of the total carp . . ::~

selected by a contractor shall not exceed 67%. That pe ~~liQWilp of a

~~\'e~rnaFiLED
contractor's selection of 50% ofthe carpenter workfo '. !1M:eNIfParagraph
3.b.(i). ofthis Order, and an additional 17%, comprised

DeCARLO, CONNOR & SH weTE#:FILED' -~~-~- ~

A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
101 CONSTITUTION AVENUE. N.W .. TENTH FLOOR' WASHINGTON. D.C.
Los Angeles" Washington, D.C .
JR6 (20~89
II
liS! . r4) rJu,
3 I

• ~113
 Case 1:90-cv-05722-RMB -THK Document 1039 Filed 03/03/11 Page 2 of 2

Honorable Richard M. Berman

United States District Court Judge
March 1,2011
Page Two

contractor whose request the District Council fulfilled in accordance with Paragraph
3.b.(iii). of this Order. However, if the number of carpenters required at a particular job
site do not divide evenly into the 670/0 contractor-33% union formula, the contractor may
select an additional carpenter whose prior employment satisfies paragraph 3.b.(iii). of this
Order.

In certain situations, the District Council and the Association disagree on the proper job
manning ratio to apply that would be in compliance with the Court's Order.

The District Council, and perhaps other parties, believe an opinion from the Court on the
issue is necessary to resolve the dispute.! Accordingly, the District Council respectfully requests
the Court to allow interested parties, e.g. parties to the collective bargaining agreement in
question, the Consent Decree, and other interested parties, the opportunity to make submissions
to the Court regarding their position on this issue, and have the Court issue a ruling that would
clarify the matter.

Your consideration of this request is appreciated. If you have any questions or require
additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Respectfully submitted,
DeCarlo, Connor & Shanley,

c2~na~:9~
Brian F. Quinn, Esq.

cc: Ben Torrance, Esq., Assistant United States Attorney

Dennis Walsh, Esq., Review Officer
Mark Rosen, Esq., Counsel for the Wall and Ceiling Industry; GCA
Frank Spencer, Supervisor, New York City District Council of Carpenters
Fred Braid, Esq. (BCA)
Joseph Kaming, Esq. (Cement League)

this regard, the Court noted that, "(i}fthe operation of paragraph 3.b.(i)-(vi) gives rise to
1 In

problems in practice, any party may call the matter to the Court's attention, with specific and, if
possible, documented illustrations of the problem encountered." Please see, Memorandum, May
26,2009, at p. 9. (Doc. #960)