The independent board, however, has used its authority to impose new safeguards on dealings between UTU members and designated legal counsel, and the manner in which UTU elections are financed.

The allegations of wrong doing were made against UTU International President Paul Thompson, General Secretary-Treasurer Dan Johnson, vice presidents Mike Futhey and David Hakey, UTU Past President Tom DuBose, former general secretary-treasurer Roger Griffeth, Local Chairperson Eric Feld, and a number of UTU designated legal counsel.

The affidavits were provided by former UTU presidents Charles Little and Byron Boyd after they pled guilty in federal court, under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, to soliciting and accepting payments from certain former UTU designated legal counsel. The affidavits were provided prior to their sentencing.

The government, which prosecuted Little and Boyd, did not consider the information in the affidavits to be credible, and there was no subpoena, indictment or criminal investigation of those mentioned in the affidavits.

The UTU Board of Ethics and Qualifications found those affidavits to "suffer from a variety of defects" including the fact they "consist largely of allegations lacking specificity, unreliable hearsay and pure speculation ... and there exist legal issues concerning the credibility of the affiants who are convicted felons ...

"It is fair to say," concluded the board, "that these defects are among the reasons the government declined to proceed on the allegations ... (the government) did not consider the information in the affidavits to be of sufficient quality to further proceed civilly or criminally against any former or current UTU member or designated legal counsel."

Board members included Josh Javits, and members Joseph Guerrieri and Clint Miller.

Javits is an attorney in private practice, focusing on alternative dispute resolution. He is a former chairman of the National Mediation Board, a former trial attorney with the National Labor Relations Board, and son of a former United States senator. Javits is chairman of the UTU Board of Ethics and Qualifications and wrote the decision.

Guerrieri, also an attorney in private practice, is a former assistant United States prosecutor for the District of Columbia, an appointed special elections officer overseeing elections of the Laborers International Union of North America, and a special counsel to the Transportation Communications Union. Guerrieri provides legal advice to the chairman and conducts investigations at the direction of the chairman.

Miller is general counsel of the UTU and serves as board secretary, primarily responsible for the docketing of complaints concerning alleged violations of the UTU Rules of Conduct and the receipt and review of UTU designated legal counsel disclosure forms. Miller played a clerical role only.

The Board of Ethics and Qualifications was established in executive session by delegates to the 2003 UTU International Convention. It was established after the delegates became aware of a federal grand jury investigation into the conduct of the UTU's designated legal counsel program.

The board's purpose is to implement and enforce rules of conduct for UTU designated legal counsel (DLC) and UTU officers governing the ethical handling of on-the-job injury cases on behalf of injured UTU members covered by the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA).

Upon receiving the affidavits of Little and Boyd, Javits instructed Guerrieri to investigate the allegations through interviews with those mentioned in the affidavits. Griffeth was the only witness who, after repeated requests, refused to be interviewed.

In a related matter, there were allegations of wrongdoing in the election of officers at the 2003 UTU International Convention. The UTU Board of Ethics and Qualifications noted that "election protests were filed with the Department of Labor ... (which thoroughly) investigated but did not take any action." However, the Board of Ethics -- as will be discussed -- imposed new safeguards to ensure election irregularities cannot occur in the future.

Among the allegations investigated by the UTU Board of Ethics and Qualifications -- and the board's conclusions -- were:

-- Little alleged that UTU International President Paul Thompson accepted gifts in the form of vacation lodging and meals from a designated legal counsel. The board noted that the allegations by Little "provide nothing that can be considered evidence, credible or otherwise ... [while] Mr. Thompson was able to provide receipts to refute Little's suggestion that a DLC may have paid for vacations taken by Thompson. It is plain that Little has reason to harbor ill-will against Thompson. Thompson had questioned service contracts entered into by Little during his tenure as UTU president and was instrumental in pressuring Little to leave office. After a full investigation of this matter, it is found that Little's implications are unworthy of belief."

-- Boyd alleged that Thompson accepted money from a designated legal counsel. The board noted that the allegations "are entirely uncorroborated and concern events alleged to have taken place over 20 years ago. Further, Boyd does not allege that Thompson knew that the funds given to him were from DLC, and Thompson denies any such knowledge. As for Boyd's suggestion that Thompson knew that furniture (in a Cleveland apartment Thompson shared with Boyd) was paid for with money from DLC, again this allegation is based entirely on speculation and not direct evidence."

-- Little alleged that UTU General Secretary-Treasurer Dan Johnson suggested the appointment of a former designated legal counsel, but, said the board, Little "admits that he does not know whether Johnson received any money from him ... Little's statements relating to current UTU General Secretary-Treasurer Dan Johnson do not even rise to the level of allegations since Little concedes that he has no actual knowledge that Johnson accepted any funds from DLC. Johnson's denial coupled with Little's admitted lack of knowledge is dispositive of the issue for purposes of this board's investigation."

-- Boyd's allegation that Johnson gave him an envelope containing money from (a DLC) suffers from a marked lack of specificity in terms of time, place or reason. Said the board, "Mr. Johnson states unequivocally that he never collected money from any attorney for anyone's campaign or for any other purpose."

-- Little suggested UTU Vice President David Hakey collected money on behalf of past president Tom DuBose. The board termed the suggestion "pure speculation, as Little does not claim any direct knowledge of any such activity. As for the allegation that Hakey showed Little a safe deposit box containing $100 bills, it strains credulity that Little did not inquire of Hakey as to where the money came from, and Little does not claim to know the source."

-- Little also alleged that Hakey told him to pick up an envelope from a DLC that Little said he "believed" contained cash. Concluded the board: "Little's belief about the contents of the envelope is again speculation. Hakey also credibly explains that as a rank and file member at the time of the alleged incident he would not have directed Little, then a UTU vice president, to do anything. Hakey also denies that he arranged to have (a DLC) pay for Little's room at the 1991 convention. In assessing Little's allegations against Hakey, it must be taken into account that Hakey refused to support Little politically when requested to do so in 1995."

-- Boyd alleged an "understanding" that UTU Vice President Mike Futhey collected money from at least one DLC on behalf of Little. Concluded the board: "With no indication provided as to the basis for Boyd's understanding, this allegation simply stands as pure speculation. It should be noted that the U.S. attorney interviewed Futhey, but never called him to testify before the grand jury."

-- Boyd alleged that former general-secretary Roger Griffeth purchased furnishings for Griffeth's Cleveland apartment using funds from DLC. Concluded the board: "While Mr. Griffeth did not controvert the allegation with receipts or other evidence, he was not required to do so because Mr. Boyd bears the burden of proof. It is also clear that Boyd and Griffeth were politically opposed."

-- Boyd alleged that current UTU local chairperson Eric Feld bragged that he received as much as $80,000 from a former UTU designated legal counsel. Said the board: "Feld adamantly denies both that he made the statement or that he received the funds. Mr. Feld was never questioned by the prosecutor concerning the allegation nor was he charged. Accordingly, at this time the board cannot conclude that Boyd has proven by a preponderance of the evidence that Feld received the payment alleged."

Concluded the UTU Board of Ethics and Qualifications, "In assessing the credibility of Little and Boyd, it must be taken into consideration that both are convicted felons. In particular, their convictions are relevant because they involve crimes of dishonesty, and thus reveal a propensity for untruthfulness. Moreover, their crimes involved disloyalty to the UTU such that their willingness to now assist the organization by providing truthful information is questionable.

"Given all of these circumstances and in light of their unsubstantiated allegations, it must be concluded that Little and Boyd are generally not credible affiants and most of their allegations, in the absence of any corroboration, specificity or hard evidence are not worthy of belief."

Finally, the board said it will "implement" the following rules "to deter any future misconduct and to eliminate even the appearance of impropriety":

-- Campaign Finance Reporting: Candidates for union office, candidate slates, and independent campaign committees will be required to report all campaign contributions and expenditures to the Board of Ethics. Contribution reports will identify each campaign donor by name and address, and the amount and date of each donation, including funds donated by an individual to his or her own campaign. Expenditure reports will identify each campaign expenditure, the vendor, the purpose of the expenditure, and the amount and date. Campaign finance reports, on a form to be provided, will be submitted to the Board of Ethics for review by the board to ensure compliance with the board's Rules of Conduct and the requirements outlined in this decision. The board may then conduct any further investigation deemed necessary regarding the reports.

-- Campaign Contributions Limit: In each election cycle, no individual shall contribute more than a total of $2,000 to any candidate or independent campaign committee. If a candidate is affiliated with a slate of candidates, no individual may contribute to the slate or the individual candidates on the slate more than a total of $2,000 multiplied by the number of candidates on the slate. In each election cycle, no candidate shall contribute more than a total of $2,000 to his or her own campaign.

-- Prohibition of Non-Member Campaign Contributions: No candidate, slate or independent campaign committee may solicit or accept campaign contributions (except an individual's own volunteered personal time) from any person who is not a full member (as opposed to honorary member, a status that DLC have enjoyed) in good standing of the UTU pursuant to Article 41 of the UTU Constitution or a retired member pursuant to Article 83 of the UTU Constitution, provided that DLC who are union members are prohibited from making campaign contributions or otherwise involving themselves in union campaigns.

-- Certification of Compliance: Upon any campaigning or nomination for office, every candidate must certify that he or she has complied with the campaign finance reporting requirements, the dollar limits on campaign contributions, and the prohibition on non-member campaign contributions. A schedule for reporting in connection with the 2007 International Convention will be distributed at a later date.

-- Sanctions: For purposes of these measures, a campaign contribution is any direct or indirect contribution of money or other thing of value for the purpose of influencing, positively or negatively, the nomination or election of a candidate. Failure to file the required reports, filing of inaccurate reports, failure to comply with the contributions limit, or receipt of campaign contributions from non-members may lead to disqualification from office, disgorgement of improper campaign contributions, or any other appropriate action. In accordance with these rules and requirements, the Board of Ethics will draft formal rules and forms to implement the remedial measures set forth above.

To view the entire 45-page Board of Ethics and Qualifications report, plus cover letter, click on this link (or paste it into the address bar of your web browser):