tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN August 26, 2016 10:00am-12:01pm EDT
sentencing is part of a larger discussion. right now we have the black discrimination, criminalsuesof disparities in employment opportunities, and these are all things at the first black president of the united states is trying to -- issues ofot race -- but the many permutations of that central problem of american history. this is just his use of clemency power to correct some, in his mind, some of the sentences, is a manifestation of that. thank youory korte, for being with us this morning. that wraps it up for this edition of "washington journal."
we are back after the weekend. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] about 45 minutes, senior advisors look at lifelong learning and housing options for seniors. they will also address quality-of-life issues facing senior citizens in the world today. you can see that conference at 1045 eastern -- 10:45 a.m. eastern on c-span two. the director of george washington university sports management program shares
perspectives on the recently .ompleted 2016 olympics also this afternoon, our to the white house coverage continues with tim kaine. he will speak with supporters at a voter registration drive in tallahassee, florida. you can watch those comments live at 2:15 p.m. eastern. book tv on c-span two. 48 hours of nonfiction books and authors every weekend. here are some future programs this weekend. eastern, the00 presidential candidacy of donald trump is the subject of ann coulter's latest book, which argues that moderates, conservatives, and democrat should support him. i think he is a genuine
patriot, loves the country. sawink he looked around and so many things going wrong that he could fix. saidat opening speech, he something to the effect of, if we don't stop this now, it will be unsalvageable. sunday, a paul ryan moderates race in america, a panel discussion on race in relation to the news, politics, and american culture, including an examination in the rise of racial incidents, their origins, and possible solutions. eastern, a former twitter advisor and facebook product manager talks about his book "chaos monkeys" which gives an inside look on silicon valley and the tech world. weekend, "the washington post" and others
recount a mission in afghanistan. the movement to increase workers wages. ktv.org for the complete weekend schedule. for campaign 2016, c-span continues on the road to white house. >> this is not a reality tv show. this is as real as it gets. >> we will make up america great again. live coverage of the presidential and vice presidential debates on c-span, c-span apps and www.c-span.org. monday, september 26 is the first presidential debate. october 4, tim kaine and mike pence debate at longwood university. october 9, washington university
in st. louis hosts the second presidential debate. leading up to the third and final debate taking place at the university of nevada las vegas on october 19. live coverage of the presidential and vice presidential debates on c-span. listen on the free c-span radio app, or listen anytime at www.c-span.org. last night, the teamsters union held a debate between candidates for leadership. this is about 90 minutes. this debate is part of the national press club in newsmakers series is organized
by the office of election supervisor, an independent authority that supervises the election of the top officers of the teamsters union. richard mark is the elections supervisor. the panelst introduce of journalists who will question them. rules require a debate among candidates nominated for general president but the rules give candidates the option to appear themselves or designate the running mate. their candidate for secretary-treasurer to appear in their stead. tonight, fred zuckerman appears in person. mr. zuckerman joined the teamsters when he helped organize chemical express in houston, texas in 1979 and later took a job as a car hauler. after serving as stewart for seven years, he became a business agent and was elected local 89 president in 2000. mr. zuckerman has served as a
grievance panel chair under general kerry and president hoffa, the car director. he is currently the director of local 89 and joint council 90 or. jim hoffa has chosen to be represented by his running mate for secretary-treasurer. mr. hall is a second-generation teamster. he started out as a member of local 175 interesting, west virginia, where he worked in the oil fields. since then, he #-- served as a shop steward and business , packagef the council division director international vice president, trustee on health welfare and pension plans . mr. hall has served as the chief negotiator of the ups national master agreement since 1997 and the chief negotiator of the ups freight agreement. let me introduce tonight panelists. michael rose, the senior
reporter from bloomberg dna, union organizing effort , and development within labor unions, including the teamsters. he reported from las vegas earlier this summer and in 2011. michael joined bloomberg in 2008 and has served as the labor reporter on capitol hill. he has a bachelors degree in journalism. kimberly atkins is the chief washington reporter for the boston herald and is a guest hosts of washington journal. she is also a staff writer for the journal news in new york. she is a graduate of weight state university and the columbia university school of journalism.
harold meyerson is the executive editor of the american prospect, the washington-based liberal magazine since 2001. he was the executive editor of the l.a. weekly. his articles on politics, the labor, economy, have all appeared in the new york, the atlantic, the op-ed commentary of the new york times and los angeles times. he is a member of the editorial board, and his print journalism has won numerous awards. he is a senior fellow at the center of american progress. he currently resides in washington. we have a live audience at the national press club in washington and the debate is in being distributed live on c-span on the internet. in addition to questions from
our panel audience members may submit questions in writing on the cards provided. also those watching online will be able to submit questions by e-mail. firstname.lastname@example.org or you can text for consideration. 202-270-8026. tonight's debate discusses major issues confronting the union. members will test -- cast their ballots in the ballot count will begin on november 14.
each candidate will have two minutes for opening statements. the order has been determined by the drawing of lots of little while ago. mr. zuckerman gets the first opening statement. mr. hall gets the closing statement. when we begin questions, i will direct the flow of our questions. the candidate to whom the question is addressed will have 90 seconds to respond. then the other one will have 45 seconds for rebuttal. if i think an answer needs further clarification or follow-up, i may ask for a follow-up question and you are entitled to 45 seconds. after questions the candidates will have an opportunity to deliver a two-minute closing statement. time is up, i will stop the
answer to keep the debate moving. i may let you finish your sentence, but not your paragraph. finally, let me caution the audience about any actions that may take away speaking time or further sanctions from the supervisor. let's begin with the candidate opening statements. mr. zuckerman: thank you for this debate. again the president is a no-show. he is never debated in front of the membership during an election. you may not know this, but this is the third debate that he has ducked this year. it is time for him to stop being a coward and stands in front of the membership and answer the members questions. they sent ken hall, who i feel is the most corrupt member of the teamsters. he took shots at me in the last debate.
we can debate this issue. he also claimed i turn ups full-time jobs into part-time jobs, and is also untrue and i open to debate those issues. the worst thing you can do as a teamster official is lie to the membership. you cannot start a conversation to fix a problem with the conversation starts with a lie. i believe we should be able to talk about the implementation of the ups contract, how the ibt lie to membership and told them it was only implemented because of health care, and why the proposal was the ibt proposal. i also believe we should talk bribe ken hall-- offered me in order not to run
in the election. me dollars to not support them in the campaign. we should talk about the continued corruption at the at the ibt that he continues to ignore. we have real problems in this union. corruption, deteriorating contracts and loss of pensions for over one half-million teamsters. >> thank you for giving me the opportunity to address a number of issues facing teamster members. i am proud of what we have done. we have organized over 200,000 workers in the past 10 years with nearly half of those coming in just the past five years. we have fedex freight at the table, which nobody thought would happen. we have contracts that provide the best health care for our members and anyone in this country. but we have to work on a major problem and that is our pension
problems. we have to make sure that we are working together, that we continue to work together because we need to hold those members of congress, whether they be republicans or democrats accountable, and to ensure that our members get the same kind of relief that those greedy people on wall street who destroyed our economy and within our pension. as you have already heard my , opponent is a self-described angry man. but he is not angry or older reasons that he tells you. he is angry because in january of 2010 he practically begged us to let him get on the slate as a candidate, and we rejected that. it was not personal at the time, i like fred. it was just the cause of his absolute horrible record as director.
you are going to hear you talk -- and talk a lot about others, because he does not want to hear about his record on a national level. i do not know why you are having to complain about debating me, i know the number two person on our sleigh, and you're the second choice on your slate. only after tim sylvester lost his local election. thank you. >> thank you. the honor of the first question by the rules goes to me. the question goes to mr. hall. let's go right into it. the election rules state that the presidential candidate may appear or send his running mate. why is he not with us? mr. hall: it seems like a fair fight we are both number two.
he is not representing our members. the fact is that he has been in office for 17 years. our members have seen him walk the picket lines, making speeches at rallies to support people they've seen on the picket lines and they now -- know that he stands for them, and that there is no good reason that he would standing here and letting an angry local union officer just run down this union. he has more important things to do than that. >> thank you. you still have time left, but we can move on. your response, mr. zuckerman? mr. zuckerman: he should be here. we have problems in this union. this is the third debate he is ducked this year.
i invited him to a debate in february, to have a debate before the membership and before the convention, and they bailed out on that. local 344 in milwaukee, the ups local, invited the candidates to debate in that local union as a request of the membership. he has docked that debate. he is not here today, either. that tells you the leadership he will provide. >> mr. hall, you have 30 seconds to respond. mr. hall: i will remind the audience that up until 2010, fred supported every issue and every policy that jim hoffa had. he didn't have these issues in previous debates, only when he wasn't selected to run as vice president with our campaign. that is when he became angry in 2010. you haven't heard him deny it, because it is fact. let's get on with the debate. we have more important things to do.
let's talk about the issues. >> turning to the panel, the first question is going to mr. zuckerman. >> shifting gears, the teamsters are a union known for the independent streak. over 10 years ago, the teamsters left the afl-cio. discuss the significance of that and whether it was a good move. would you consider rejoining the afl-cio, and if so, under what circumstances? do you feel teamsters should work with other unions more than they do? mr. zuckerman: one of our failures is because we divided the house of labor by pulling out the afl-cio and getting a change to win. change to win has been a failure. it started with nine international unions in 2005, and now it is down to three. they do nothing. it was supposed to be a vehicle
to continue organizing, and we are not organizing. right now, all we do is steel -- steal members or merge with other international unions. the international union claims they have 1.4 million members. that is incorrect. the last numbers were 1.25. if you take the mergers from ble p, the maintenance away folks, the gic you, that was 130,000 we brought in. take that off the one point 25 and now you are at 1.1. take the recent organizing victories that they claim, can claimed it in his opening statement, they were not organizing guys. they were mergers with other local unions, or they were raiding other local unions, like in 2011, the local down there, which they took from the flp. we are not organizing anybody. what we are doing is taking them
from other areas, and union density in the united states is down to 8% now. that is because we are not organizing new people. >> you have 45 seconds to respond. mr. hall: we have organized over 220,000 people in 10 years. in terms of whether we should have gotten out of the afl, we work together with the afl on different programs. we are working with them on political programs. we work with unions all over the country. 10 years ago, when we did this, fred was a supporter of it. he was on board. he supported the policies. but then, don't call you flip-flop freddie for nothing. in local 89, you haven't done any organizing. you'll have organized four companies in the last five years, and out of eight attends, four companies 108 , members. >> 30 seconds to respond.
mr. zuckerman: let's talk about mr. hall's record. in 17 years that hoffa has been in office, ken hall has lost 25% of his membership. that is a fact. his pension fund is in the toilet. that is a fact. now, he can't hide from that. as for me not objecting to the policies for the last 10 years, that is inaccurate. i went to hoffa in 2000 eight, and we broke ranks when he would not organize. >> thank you. next question, directed to mr. hall. >> mr. hall, last week, ups ceo urged other business leaders to push congress to support the transpacific partnership deal, saying it was important to support small and midsize businesses. what is your message to congress about the tpp as it affects your membership, and if it passes,
what would you do to protect your membership from the perils of the tpp as you see them mr. ? mr. hall: we have been working day and night to make sure it doesn't pass. the ceo of ups supports it, and that doesn't mean anything to us. it doesn't mean we should support it. the ceo and ups supports another group we despise. we have disagreements. but i can tell you, we are not looking for what we will do to protect our members once it passes. we are looking to keep the pressure on to make sure that tpp doesn't pass. we are in a position where both presidential candidates seem to be against it. lots of members of congress, as well. we think we will be successful in being able to do that. now, and that is really my answer on this issue. but i do want, for the rest of my time, to, its fact check time, fred. you said you broke with hoffa in 2008.
here is a letter from you on january 8, 2010, not only talking about how you supported him forever, but this is the letter you sent asking to be put on the board, and pledging your undying support from your local and your joint council. this is january 2010 on your letterhead. signed by you. so it is time to tell the truth. something that hasn't happened a lot in your campaign. >> mr. zuckerman, you have 45 seconds. mr. zuckerman: we are against tpp and that is obvious. let's talk about the letter. the letter, and it doesn't say all the things you say in it, but this letter was requested at a joint council meeting in charleston, west virginia, in 2009. december 2009. ken hall came to me at randy's bar and you requested i write the general president a letter to make that request.
and i specifically said, you know what? i'm not going to beg anybody for a job. i refused to do that. rich was the one that wrote that. i signed it, but rich wrote it. don't come in here and telling lies like that. >> mr. hall, redirect. mr. hall: the only thing i can tell you, the bobbin of it says fred zuckerman and it has your signature. it says, i have supported your administration since 1998, and i support your policies and programs. it goes on to say, as you know, local 89 is one of the largest locals in the ibt and is the home of the ups air hub. i would be honored to serve as the -- on the general executive board and president of joint council 94 and local 89. we promise you the support of our office. it wasn't my fault you wrote this letter. >> our next question is for mr. zuckerman.
>> mr. zuckerman, the travails of the central state pension fund are fairly well-known. is there anything the previous generation of the teamster leadership should have done about that pension fund, to have kept it in better shape? and now, going forward, now that mr. feinberg struck down the arrangement, is there anything different that a zuckerman administration would do that is different from what they hoffa administration would do to get congress to resolve these problems? mr. zuckerman: even into doesn't -- in 2008 when i went to the general president and told him it was important to organize, and he rejected that, i feel that we have to organizing core industries and put participants into the funds. when ken hall took ups out of central state, that collapsed the fund. at the time, there were, when ups was in the fund, there were 104,000 participants.
it was like a two to one ratio. add on the fact that they didn't organize since 2000, when jim hoffa took office, had they not taken ups out of fund and had they organized and put participants into the fund, the fund would be healthy today. it is not healthy because of a lot of bad decisions, and they are still trying to take people out of the fund. in 2007, the central states fund took in $1.44 billion in participant contributions. $568,000 intake in participant contributions. it is -$880 million. almost $1 billion they are not taking in. the fund cannot survive without participants. right now, central states is 59,000 participants to 235,000 retirees. it is going this way.
they are trying to take kroger out now, to make it 52,000. they are purposely collapsing this fund. >> mr. hall? >> can i ask you to follow up with this allegation of taking ups out of the central state pension fund? mr. hall: fred is rewriting history. he says he broke with jim in 2008, which i proved was a lie. in 2007, mr. zuckerman sat on them national negotiating committee at ups. i didn't show up any much -- very much, but he was appointed as a member. he voted for it. his members voted for it. they voted for that contract. so now, he tells you this. the fact is, this the fact. this is not the angry rhetoric. the facts are, in january 2015, central state submitted to the treasury department that if the economy hadn't have collapsed in 2008 and 2009, with the $6 million the government and ups
would have made the fund fully funded by -- 2028. that is their words. >> mr. zuckerman? mr. zuckerman: they were advised by central states not to do it. they did it anyway. that is a part of bargaining. you keep people in the pension funds or take them out. everybody knew that it was a mistake to do that. we were told in that negotiation that you had done, you had done some due diligence, and the officials that were advising you said that it was a good thing for central state. we didn't know that central states had recommended that they didn't do it, and that it would be a very bad thing. and that, ultimately, that is what happened. >> thank you. let's start from the panel. mr. rose? mr. rose: this is about organizing. this union recently has touted its inroads in organizing new industries like health care and municipal government workers. are you concerned that the union
is putting too much emphasis on new industries at the expense of its traditional basis of support in industries, and have you strike a balance between organizing in industries where teamsters have historically represented many workers, and branching out into new areas? >> as far as the people we have organized in the past 10 years, i would point out that 12,000 of them was at a company to use to be called overnight, and is now ups freight. first major organizing campaign in 50 years at freight. some of the naysayers said we -- said this wouldn't happen. we are sitting across the table from fedex freight, which a lot of people said would never happen. we are in negotiations with them. we have organized a lot of people, but you continue, i don't think there is anything wrong with organizing health care workers and others. in fact, i think everybody deserves an opportunity to be represented by our union and you
have better working conditions and better pay and benefits. now, if my opponent can tell you which of the companies that we have organized that we shouldn't be organizing and shouldn't be in the union, that is fine. but i have heard this core industry argument for the past two elections. i listened to this from one of his running mate's five years ago. we believe everyone has a chance. we have organized, just in the past 7-8 years, more in core industries than the last 50 years in this organization. >> mr. zuckerman? mr. zuckerman: that's not true. organizing core industries keeps the standards up in those industries. talk about fedex, or they talk about ups freight, ups freight was given to them when they agreed to get out of the ups pension plan. ups freight has been a disaster. the worst freight contract out there. didn't help anybody in the freight industry.
what happens in the core industries, such as warehousing, grocery, freight, car hold, and others, if you don't keep those standards up, every time you get to the bargaining table, the first thing they say is, we need concessions because we have to negotiate down here. if we were to bring these people up, it raises our standard of living, it raises our contracts, and we can put people into the pension funds, which we need to do. >> mr. hall? mr. hall: i can only respond by saying ups freight is the highest-paid freight workers , whether they are union or nonunion, in the united states of america, so how fred could say it didn't raise them up, i don't know. but i can tell you, it is strange to me you would bring that up, since your drivers at kroger, the largest grocery warehouse in the country, have gotten a six-year contract that
they get a total of $.64 per hour increase over six years. take care of your business at home. >> next question, to mr. zuckerman. ms. adkins: mr. zuckerman, you accuse the hoffa administration of negotiating, quote, weak concessionary contract. can you point out specific instances where you blocked the kind of concessions you accuse your opponent of supporting? mr. zuckerman: we will talk about that trend service contract he was talking about. in 2006, kroger wanted to subcontract a lot of our work and they wanted concessions to do that. we negotiated with those companies, and we negotiated far superior contracts than the ibt has negotiated in the kroger master contract. we don't pay for health care. we got better health care. we are in the central state pension fund. we have far superior conditions
and benefits that they negotiate. we continue to do that. ms. adkins: to follow-up, mr. hall, can you point to specific instances where you pushed back against proposed management concessions? mr. hall: we do that at every negotiation. if you sit down with him -- with employers, they want concessions. we have to look at not just issues of subcontracting and other things, for example, i didn't hear mr. zuckerman saying anything about this, $.66 over six years. he is failing to tell you that in that kroger contracts, they have unlimited use of casual employees, which is worse than subcontracting. we face that, we face concessionary attempts by employers every time we sit down at the table. he calls the ups contract concessionary? i call it people who make between 88,000 dollars as a package, and $105,000 as a
driver in total benefits of up to 150 thousand dollars, that is hardly concessionary and it is better than the contracts. >> your response? mr. zuckerman: yes. the ups contract that he identifies is a small segment of the ups people that work there. they have a lot of part-timers that start at $10 per hour. they do not get health care for for the first 12 months. they only have a three hour guarantee. you know, i was campaigning in new york city not too long ago, and down at foster avenue in brooklyn, you have people showing up on city buses for $10 per hour for these part time jobs and then they leave, and they go to a homeless shelter. we have to do better than that. that is a huge majority of the workers at ups, part-time employees.
>> your time is up, sir. thank you. the next question goes to mr. hall. >> mr. hall, by my count, the teamsters are one of only about three national unions that haven't made an endorsement in that other presidential election that seems to be going on. most of the other unions have sort of concluded that whatever her flaws may be, hillary clinton made be a more pro-worker president than donald trump. do you think that is an accurate assessment? and why do the teamsters not, to date, make an endorsement in the american presidential contest? mr. hall: first of all, it is obviously important to members, and it is something that we are, we are in the process right now, we don't, from the top down, just declare that we are going to support one person over another. we do surveys with our local
union leaders, our joint council leaders, we sent a survey to fred, and we get the pulse of what our people across the country are saying. we are in that process right now, and i would expect that there will be an announcement from us coming very, very shortly. but not only are we talking about the presidential election, we are also very, very focused on what is going to happen in congress. because we want to make sure, we want to make sure that the people that we are supporting are going to be working with us, and are going to vote for us and support pension reform, which is the biggest issue facing our union. we have to make sure our members can retire with dignity. it will not get done by name-calling. we have to make sure that whoever we endorse will support our cause. the same thing that is going on because they have moved alec and others, they have moved from
state to state with right to work. i have been fighting right to work in west virginia. we got a preliminary and -- injunction against it. but we are looking at the big picture. not just a presidential race. i think you will see an announcement from us. we will not support anybody who supports right to work. >> mr. zuckerman? mr. zuckerman: we got surveys and are filling them out. we will support the person that best supports the teamsters union. i want to talk about the right to work. in kentucky, we worked hard with the afl-cio to make sure that we always defeat right to work. we did defeat right to work. we worked and we worked and we worked, they had a special election. we got three seats and any , politician in kentucky will tell you, it wasn't for the labor, we would have right to work. in west virginia, they didn't do
the job to keep it out of there. >> mr. hall? mr. hall: i can only respond that the record is clear. not only did we work with the afl-cio unions, i went to the person designated for labor to testify for three hours at the senate judiciary committee. just two weeks ago, i was the person the afl asked to represent the entire labor movement in west virginia in a court hearing, where we sought a preliminary injunction to stop right to work for now. we were successful at that. for fred to suggest that that means we are not working with afl-cio is yet another thing that is not exactly true. >> it is my discretion to ask the following question. i want to get at this issue. obviously, you are in a hard spot, given this is a presidential election cycle. is there any truth to the idea that the teamsters would like to endorse hillary clinton, but are worried that would rankle the rank and file that may be
supporting donald trump? mr. hall. mr. hall: let's be clear. if you look at working people across the country, our members have questions about both of the candidates. i think it is clear that one of them is, i am reminded of other people, one of them seems to be an angry man who spews out lots of falsehood. he has already demonstrated he is for right to work. i think once we have given our members the message and they understand, and the republican platform, we have been educating our members about the republican platform. to do exactly what you are talking about, make sure we are not just saying, we tell you support this. they have to be on board with that. that is what we are doing. the answer is, we will not wait. i will guess you will see in the next 7-14 days, an endorsement from the teamsters. mr. burr: mr. zuckerman, 45 seconds. mr. zuckerman: i think the idt
-- idt has squandered an opportunity, typically in these types of elections, you go and you talk to the candidates, you identify the ones that you want to endorse, and then, you work with them to make sure that they are going to help you going forward. you negotiate with them. ibt has squandered that. we are 75 days away from the election. it is too late to do that now. mr. burr: we'll get one more let -- one more round from the panel, then we will go to questions submitted by the campaigns and members. the next question is for mr. zuckerman. >> as you know, the union has touted the end of the 1980 nine -- 1989 consent to create that dictated federal supervision of the union. it has been replaced by documents which permanently replace the independent review board with a different enforcement mechanism.
it also requires that elections be independently supervised. i am wondering your view of how significant are these changes, and how you expect union governance to change under the new final agreement. mr. zuckerman: i think of was a mistake to petition the court and try to get out of the consent order at the time that they did last january. they are fully aware that there is still corruption in the union. they went to court and told them that we were corruption-free, and we are not. every day, you hear something new about corruption, and the ibt is not doing anything to correct it. we have an international vice president out west who has been brought up on charges that the ibt has delayed twice now, and his hearing won't be until october 11. there is no question he will get thrown out of the union for what he did. i read his deposition and the charges, and he admitted to a lot of the things they accused him of. there is no getting out of that.
we have another incident with the ohio conference, ken hall was directly involved in that. he didn't do his job to monitor what the ohio conference was doing year after year. in our business, we are required to send in monthly trustee reports, and the idt has the ability to go in there and audit the conference. he didn't do that. in 2006, we were given a recommendation by the ibt to shut all the conference is down. i was the president of the kentucky-west virginia conference. ken was on that conference. we shut it down for exactly the reasons they took the ohio conference down and put it into trusteeship. mr. burr: your response? mr. hall: you were the head of that conference at the time, fred. first of all, he is talking about people that have been charged. there are people that have been
charged, and there will always be people who have been charged. i don't know, i don't believe fred will be the judge and jury on this, but we believe in the same concept that we believe for our members. if they get terminated by the company, they are not guilty until proven innocent. they are innocent until proven guilty. at the courts decide, then we will address it in the same, in the manner we should. i want to point out, fred's running mate embezzled $220,000 from the union, and this is what fred said. whatever i can do to help, i am in. brothers forever. he supported him breaking the union for $220,000 because he was his running mate. this is your e-mail. mr. burr: your response? mr. zuckerman: brad was jim hoffa's take for vice president. when he needed some help, probably with that e-mail says, i told him i would help him with legal fees or whatever.
that was before the irb reports got out, and those kinds of things. ken hall knew in 2006, i was president of the conference. we closed it down because we were told to close it down for all of the reasons why the ohio conference should have been closed down. mr. burr: next question for mr. hall, it comes from kimberly atkins. ms. adkins: like with all elections, turnout is important. in the last election in 2011, about 250,000 members voted, that is less than 1/5 of the total membership. why is the membership so turned -- tuned out? mr. hall: turnout is and always has been a problem for us, since we started the direct elections. i absolutely support, always, having our members have the opportunity to vote for the top offices. one of the things, we tried lots of different things. the election offices, last time, had celebrities doing robo calls
to members to try to get them to come out and vote. i think a lot of the issues are, if a member is satisfied with their contract and satisfied with the way things are going, they don't bother to get involved in the process. and that is unfortunate. we would like, it would benefit me in this campaign, or the hoffa-hall teen, if we had 90% turnout. but that is something we have been working towards to get more people to turn out. mr. burr: your response? mr. zuckerman: members are angry, just like i am. members are angry. they have lost hope, and quite frankly, they want something different. that should turn out the vote. i think it will in the election. last time, we didn't have a campaign going. a lot of people were shielded from the election. this time, it is different. we are getting the word out,
making sure that people have an opportunity to know that there is an election, and that there is going to be, they will have to get out there and vote. mr. hall: i would point out that fred is on the slate on the opposite side last time, and it was the lowest voter turnout we have had in all the elections. i don't believe that is quite accurate. mr. burr: next question is for mr. zuckerman. >> in seattle, at the prompting of seattle teamsters and teamster lawyers, the seattle city council voted to give collective-bargaining rights to independent contractors driving uber and lyft, and cab drivers as well. the issue of whether your members are mislabeled as independent contractors, that has been an issue with the port truckers. this leads to the question of, the next time labor people and progressives push for labor law reform, you are looking at a different kind of job market. all kinds of people may not be
in traditional employment relations. what do you think the teamsters should be talking about in terms of the next generation? who should be covered how should , that work? mr. zuckerman: first of all, i think the teamsters need to pick -- fix their own house first. people start getting into discussions about going outside of our core industries. we have a lot of problems with standards, a lot of problems with pensions, problems with all those things. fundamentally, i believe that everybody in america has a right to get together and join a union. i would not be an opponent to that. i think that the teamsters union should fix their own problems before we start going outside and fixing somebody else's problems. mr. burr: mr. hall? mr. hall: i don't consider organizing new workers outside. i consider that something that is our duty to do. it doesn't square to me to say
that we should fix the problems before we organize, when i have heard us criticized because we do not organize enough. in terms of trying to answer directly the question of uber, uber and others like them, with the technology, we know this is the new frontier. we have to be very careful. we want to give them representation. we have also been leading the fight against misclassification of workers, so we are not going to enter into a contract that waves our right to challenge the misclassification. that is really the struggle right now. we are looking into getting into those industries, and we should. we have to move with the times. but we also have to protect the integrity of those contracts. mr. burr: mr. zuckerman? you have 30 seconds. mr. zuckerman: i'm sorry. like i said before, they have a right. americans have a right to have a
voice in what they want if they collectively assert that voice, i think that is a good thing. i think, like i said before, we need to fix our problems for us. we have a lot of problems. we are not organizing. we have lost 400,000 members in the 17 years that hoffa has been there. we need to focus on the industries that we already have. mr. burr: thank you. we will now go to a portion well -- where i will ask questions submitted by your campaigns to each other, as well as question submitted by members of the teamsters. the question goes to mr. hall. this question is from frank of local 630 in los angeles. i will read some words here, these are from mr. villa. you celebrated the government getting out of the union, and your former anticorruption czar says how do leaders respond? circle the wagons or repudiate?
when your tradeshow division byectors had dogs extort and members, he was in jail. he refused to hold hearings on corruption charges against your running mate. for taking employer get in exchange for gets for contract concessions. mr. hall: first of all, i think they must be talking about, i am not certain, they didn't name names but i believe they are talking about somebody in the first instance who we did not try and find innocent. they went through the court system and were found guilty. once they were found guilty, they were removed. again, they get their day in court. and we complied with that. the one thing that is there, let me be clear, the teamsters union does not condone violence, nor do they condone corruption. in the case of my running mate,
i answered this once, he is going through the system. we are not delaying anything. we followed our constitution, and his hearing is scheduled, and that is what is supposed to happen. we will talk about, we will deal with that once his case is heard, just like we have for the last 25 years. mr. burr: your response, mr. zuckerman? mr. zuckerman: corruption in the unions is unacceptable. the first gentleman he was talking about, local 82 in boston. the ibt knew for years about what was going on up there and wouldn't act on it. he was the director of a division, i forget which division, but tonight, he is sitting in jail because the ibt never did do anything about it, and they allowed him to continue in his capacity in leadership when they knew that things were wrong. the same things happened to the director of the dairy division, the director of the warehouse division.
they should've at least suspended him instead of continuing to allow him to, to represent the membership in any of those divisions. mr. burr: your response? mr. hall: have you send him any money for legal expenses? we have covered this. they are entitled to a hearing. fred, there is something you have a chance to fix. you have got, one of your delegates was disqualified by the election office, and was not only disqualified, but and from being at the convention, banned from even being in a hotel. what action did you take? you appealed that decision. in the appeal, after first denying it happened, your lawyers agreed it happened, but you didn't like the penalty. have you done anything, did you remove him as steward? mr. zuckerman: to answer the
question -- mr. burr: we asked you several questions. mr. zuckerman: this is getting ridiculous. we had one guy push a guy, he got disqualified for being a delegate, and that was the end. as for me sending brad any money, i never sent him any money. have you make this stuff up? you are making it up. as you keep going, you make stuff up, and that is the problem. you will always get caught in a lie. mr. burr: i will give you 45 seconds. mr. hall: i think you said in the e-mail, maybe i sent him that to do something about legal expenses before the irb report. i took it from what you just said. but i would point out in your e-mail, it was clear that he has been put in trusteeship, and your words are your words. it is not just a small incident that happened in local 89. this was battery on another of
your members, in your local union who was a steward. , i will ask you again, did you remove him as a steward, or are you you allowing someone to represent your local union who was convicted, not charged, as you talked about some of the other people, convicted of committing battery against another member? mr. burr: we could go on and off for a little while, it seems, so i will move on. you can use your time any point later on to respond if you would like. this is for mr. zuckerman, submitted by tommy of local 639. mr. zuckerman, you have said the solution to the pension problem is to organize workers into pension plans. out of the four small companies you have organized in the last five years, how many companies have you put into the central state pension fund? mr. zuckerman: three out of 5 -- three out of four.
let me just say about that, i am a proponent of supporting the central state pension fund, unlike the international union. they are doing everything they can do to kill it. i organize three companies recently. we put in, it was precision auto, world-class corrugated, and the voice people we got act -- we got back after the international union wouldn't help us after the battle. $20 million backpay. we need to continue to do that. i can tell you one thing, i have got more central states pension participants then ken hall has in his local. he has lost 25% of his local, and i have more participating in central states. mr. burr: would you like to respond? mr. hall: at one point, fred, i thought you were confused.
now, i think you might just be lying. 400,000 members that we lost, do we have a 1.8 million members i don't know about? 25%? you are making it up as you go. let's do this. let's talk about, you told everybody around the country about voigt. i have an e-mail where you thanked the general counsel for giving him assistance on benefits. let's talk about this. his lawyer represented and won the case for you, then you met with the company, cut a deal for $15 million, the regional director refused to take it, and had to sit you back to get $20 million. you settled short again, fred. mr. zuckerman: 30 seconds isn't going to be able to respond to this. there was no agreement for $15 million, it was always 21.6 million dollars. the regional director never said us back to get any money.
that is a lie. what else was there? there are plenty more lies. i just can't keep up with them all. he keeps spewing them out there. mr. burr: i think we are going back to mr. hall next. mr. hall, a question for you from paul, local 377 in youngstown, ohio. i hauled gm cars out of the plant in ohio. auto companies are making record profits, but hoffa negotiated a concessionary contract which was rejected by 87% of our members. when the ups contract was negotiated, two thirds of members voted down supplements after health care was cut. doesn't the show the national leadership is out of touch with the members? mr. hall: well, my opponent has been trying to get people to turn down the current contract. here's what i would point out in terms of how we negotiate.
fred became the director in 2005. he was the car hall director. i was the director of ups. here is how it turned out. ups got $6.65 per hour in raises, car haulers got $1.75 per hour in raises. we are not talking about concessions, we are talking about, somebody who is, just like you did with ups, fred is playing politics with the car haulers contract. that is better than the one he negotiated. he's in 2008 was rejected by the members. he forgot to get the work reservation agreement signed, and tried to claim he did. he went to the nlrb, who rejected that. fred sold the members a bill of goods and said you have worked preservation. it wasn't signed.
i don't need any lectures from i don't need any lectures from someone who has, who has been such a failure, and by the way, fred, i was wrong and i'm going to admit it, when i said you lost half of our members. it went from a little over 9202 4200. that is more than half. mr. burr: mr. zuckerman, 45 seconds. mr. zuckerman: there is a lot of truth in that. truth in that. -- there is not a lot of truth in that either. he doesn't understand that in 2008 when we negotiated the contract, there were three manufacturers that were in bankruptcy were close. border -- ford motor company mortgaged everything they had and borrowed money so they could avoid bankruptcy. general motors and chrysler had gone into bankruptcy, and the government had to bail them out. those are pretty tough times back then. no question. you have to understand, these car haul companies have a handful of customers. gm, ford, chrysler. all of them were in the toilet. you have toyota, honda, nissan,
those kinds of things, those were very tough times. i will tell you one thing, tom, and ken has the utmost respect for tom -- mr. burr: your time is up. mr. zuckerman: he said i did in outstanding job -- an outstanding job. mr. burr: mr. hall? mr. hall: i think facts matter sometimes, in most cases. the numbers i gave you are the numbers that are reflected as the number of active members we have working. the contract, you may have had tough times in 2008. you did negotiate another contract in 2011. in 2011, you had the same kinds of wage increases. in fact, when you started as car haul director, and looked at what car hollers were making,
-- where haulers were making, at the same time ups folks, over the same timeframe, when you took over as director, car haul members were within five dollars of ups workers. that is now over $10. that is the kind of leadership that you provided. you don't know how to settle anything. mr. burr: thank you. next question is for mr. zuckerman. this was submitted by the other campaign. you have campaigned against pdu in your local for years. --tdu in your local for years . at one point, the question says, you call them tear down unions. you had vanity plates on your motorcycle that said, td you -- tdu sucked. why do you take their support? mr. zuckerman: i don't support anybody other than the membership. the membership is who pays my salary. whatever is right for the membership, that's what i
support. so if you say i flip lopped because i do not support hoffa anymore, or i flip lopped on the td you issue, i don't consider it flip-flopping. we have formed a coalition to run against a corrupt organization, a corrupt executive board, and they are on board with that. i have never been tdu. i want everybody to hear that, because all of you are going around saying, these are -- he is a tdu guy and will tear down the union. even tdu says i am not tdu. never happened. so we formed a coalition, they agree on the same principles in this campaign that we agree on, we have to eliminate corruption, we have to eliminate the week contracts, we have to eliminate the ibt lying to the membership, particularly what mr. hall did on the last ups contract, we
have to stop that. they agree with me on those issues, they support my campaign, and frankly, i appreciate the support of that group, including at least thousands and thousands of hoffa, ex-hoffa supporters. i guess they are all tdu guys, too. mr. hall: you are angry. i would say, let's put it this way. 10 out of 11 people who are around today in the teamsters who ran on your slate last time are now supporting the hoffa-hall slate, because they figured out who you are. i would say this, at one time, they had your picture on a milk carton that said you were missing. in 2008, you make 230 $9,000 off -- you made $239,000 off their dues, and you are missing is the
director. this came from tdu. i can't answer whether you are tdu or not, and frankly don't care. mr. burr: mr. zuckerman, do you want to redirect? mr. zuckerman: no. there is no sense in it. mr. burr: all right, we are saving time. mr. hall, this came from a text. i do not have the members name. how could the last contract with united parcel service imposed on the membership, despite repeatedly being voted down by the central region? this contract's concession-filled and ups bargaining unit employees are stuck with reduced benefits, deplorable conditions, and no right to strike. how you explain this deck? >> i don't know what they are talking about the right to strike. nothing has changed in the contract about that. i just saw some information that -1 of our members think
their benefits are pretty good and i heard from fret about it and i would challenge him tonight to tell me specifically about it that is bad. let's call it the way it is. the reason this contract was rejected is because fred decided he is going to play politics with it. let's talk about what happened in his negotiations. the kind -- the company had $1000 per member over a shuttle mission -- or a shuttle issue on the table. he took it off the table and cheney -- and traded it for a problem he felt a fixed in 2002. full-time jobs. i know this, instead of worrying about full-time jobs, he's got 600 and some jobs that have a six hour guarantee, part-time benefits, part-time wages except the part-timers don't get overtime when they work over
five like they do everywhere else in the united states of america. money look at how much that company saved, it's over $8 million per year on that. that's 16 million dollars that fred gave back to them in concessions. it's no secret why ups has the largest air hub in their operation in louisville, suchcky because they have a sweetheart deal with spread zuckerman. been there ahe has long time so that's a ridiculous statement. you gave up the right to strike in the contract because you noses to file the f7 which is a federal requirement that the legal ability to strike. i did eight lawyer requests during that time and you never sent it in on time. the health care is concessionary. can hall stood up and said we were not paid $90 or nine dollars or nine cents or health care. i just love new jersey and instead of the 40's and raise they were supposed to get, they got a $.10 raise because $.30 of
that raise had to go to health care. on the west coast, they have to use the pension money and the benefits are far inferior than the company plan and we've got a deposition from a guy at ubs is that you are the one that care.ed the it was not the company that proposed team care. >> i don't know where to start with all of that. what i would tell you is that, first of all, i have sent you letters and copies of them and i know you're sensitive to the issue of not opening the contract. i also am told that you did not open the contract in kara hall and you could not get the preservation agreement. i will say to one more time, tell me specifically instead of the rhetoric, told his audience what the problem with the health insurance and if there is a legitimate problem, i would be happy to address it. mr. zuckerman, we had a lot
of questions about pensions coming in from viewers outside this room. i would like to spend -- opinion down specifically. what would you do differently from the current administration on the central state pension plan? >> what would i do now? we have to work with the plan instead of against it. they have never worked with the plan. number two, we need some kind of government helps to stabilize the fund. they only got enough money to last about eight or 10 years now and we need to make sure that happens. nobody is going to give us money and continue to pay our bills. you'll not get a for the government or the tooth fairy. to implement some kind of self-help and that takes organizing inner core industries and putting the people back in the picture. >> would you like to comment question mark >> i don't disagree that the more members have the better and that's part
of a solution. it's not me to say that has been bashing central states. we do have to work together but i said that earlier. i said we have to continue to work on plans now. part of it is going to have to be getting help from the government. they bailed out and gave loans to all of these people who destroyed the economy. and we've got to kind of put the pressure on them to do it but there are other things we can do that we are trying to do that are going to be able to convince -- we have to make this work. we have to all stop finger-pointing and stop the blame game. everybody should be working together because this is the most important issue facing our members and particularly our retirees. >> mr. zuckerman? >> that's incredulous for them to come appear and they have
destroyed the fund over 17 years and tell you a couple of days before an election that we are out there trying to get something done. you have got to be kidding me. they are the ones that destroyed this pension fund and now you're out there -- why weren't you doing it 17 years ago? you're the one that took them out and you're the one that collapsed the fund and you're the one that sat on the executive board and did not do a dam thing about organizing in the core industries since 2003. now they want to say it's a bad situation let's try to do something about it. you are too late. you need to leave and you need to put people in there that will get the job done. >> i will give you 45 seconds, mr. hall, if you want to respond. >> we're not too late. to say is too late to do something a fix our pensions is irresponsible. we have to continue to fight this. i don't know what part of this you don't understand.
since 2003, you say we have not done this or that. we have brought more people into the freight industry since 2003 than we did the previous 40 years and you know that. you continue to talk about letting ups out. the fact is, you set on the negotiating committee and voted for it and went back and recommended to her members and they voted for it. audience,you tell the would you take ups out of their plan and put them back in the central states of your elected? >> 45 seconds, mr. zuckerman. >> you have already convinced that they cannot get that job done because you destroyed the fun and you cannot go back to the upsers and say let's put them back in the fund. another thing you did is destroyed the pensions for every upser that retired prior to 2008.
under this last submission to treasury, those folks were going to get cut 70% it's a dam good thing. . that that got rejected the people you were supposed to represent would have lost everything they had because of your decision. >> thank you, next question to mr. hall. have backednions ted strickland for ohio senator. teamsters have endorsed rob portman. can you explain the endorsement? tell you it's simply because of the issue we have been talking so much about. a difficult decision because we're certainly opposed to free-trade. we demonstrated that by leading the fight on tpp and others. we refer to it as nafta on steroids. the reason, the sole reason is because we got a commitment that he would vote for our members on
reform andf pitching we have sent this message. you have heard me say a couple of times that it does not matter if you are democrat or republican, we have got people who we have supported in the past who were not willing to step up to the plate when it came to the pension issue. test.s our litmus if they are not going to stand up for our members pensions, they will not get our support. if it's -- if it's a republican vote,emonstrates by his which he did, that he would support our pension issue, then we are going to swallow hard and other issues and make sure we support somebody who will address the most important issue we have facing our members and retirees today. >> mr. zuckerman? what theyt tell you are thinking up there because they don't communicate with me at all ever since i started opposing their leadership.
they took me off the national committees like the grievance committee and they don't return my letters or my phone calls. whatever they are thinking up there with regards to some kind of support for anybody, i've got no idea what they are doing. i would like to jump back and talk about the six hour jobs he is talking about. up last time and said i converted full-time jobs two part-time jobs which is an absolute lie. office,before i took the then income had signed an agreement with ups. the six hour jobs come from the part-time ranks, not the full-time ranks. the three-hour guys get to bid on six our jobs and they are making $80,000 per year. initially, we had gone through the ibt for help to invalidate that agreement because it was signed the day before we had taken office. he knows about it. >> your time is up, i'm sorry.
clear, he did ask us for help and i drove from my local to louisville, kentucky to meet with his lawyers to go to arbitration to overturn that because someone from his local had indeed signed it on their last day in office. ann.person trenem him and then turned around and hired him and paid in money as a consultant to represent ups workers. >> thank you, next question to mr. zuckerman -- this is from owl gonzalez, local 988, he is a second-generation freight teamster and he wants to ask what you have done in 2014 if you were the general askedent when the yrc the teamsters about the memo of understanding or they would shut the doors and what would you do to rebuild teamster power in freight?
yrcood question because the thing is a mess. theye firstmou, negotiated it without knowing what would happen with the teamsters. i was at the two men committee in dallas, texas at the presentation. he said we are going to agree to a 25% contribution rate. i was a guy that asked, how is that going to affect everybody in these plans? he said he had not talked to anybody in those plans. then i went back to my membership and told them to reject the agreement which they did unanimously. nobody knew when the teamsters were voting on that agreement that they were going to kick him out of the western conference pension fund and they then put them into a 401(k). i was campaigning in gardena california and one guy wanted to retire early who was within 300 paid hours to retire and they
told him he could not do it and now he has to work until he's six to five years old because the ibt failed to do their job. with regard to 2014 negotiations, i don't know because i am not privy to any commission -- and he can medication with the ibt because i am in the doghouse. i don't know. exactly what the negotiations were one thing i would have done is to involve the membership in these discussions which they did not do. time's up. >> mr. hall. >> is there anything going right with the teamsters? yrc is tough. in 2008 when we found out they were on the bank of bankruptcy because their ceo dollars had run the company totally in the ground. what we are left with is what we are dealing with today. with lots ofe things they do.
we don't agree with management getting paid bonuses. we don't agree with any of that but we've got a company that provides about $2 billion per year in wages and benefits for our members and we cannot make notdecision because we're just going to walk away. we have to give our members an opportunity and that's what we did. we negotiated an agreement and asked our members up we wanted or not. we don't recommend it but we asked them to make the decision and it was a tough one. >> i wanted to respond to the gentleman's question about how you rebuild frayed. contrary to what he says about ups freight, we have not been organizing in freight. they blame the pension problems on deregulation. regulation six years ago, give it a break. there is just as many trucks and freight companies and freight being moved and drivers on the that there was back
then. we have not done anything about it. we have not gotten out there and organized anybody. had we done that, the why rc guys would not be in the problem they are today because they would copy competing with an nonunion stem here. nonunion's down here. to one moreo back round with a panel in the next question is for mr. hall. >> it's another pension question. a teamster vice president told one of my colleagues in may that the union was working on a proposal that would compete other sources of funding for multiemployer plans that would require legislative action but would not involve government funding. can you tell us the status of that or other teamster proposal to deal with the crisis facing multiemployer plans? plan continue to work on a that is similarly structured to what you talk about. given allhing to be
of corporate america and opportunity to sit here and spar with each other and have somebody downgrade everything that goes on in the teamsters. i will not reveal specifically what it is better talking about because it is confidential at this point and if that were to leak, it damages our ability to move forward to the next up of the plan. >> mr. zuckerman? >> the only reason why we are sparring up here is because there is a tremendous amount of people out here that believe that the administration is corrupt and not doing their job and not organizing and so on. i have seen a copy of that plan. the plan is a disaster. because it's confidential, i cannot reveal what's in the plan. .t will not work it's a plan they say they have that they are putting around that has zero chance of success
and it's not going anywhere. >> mr. hall? >> i am absolutely certain he has not seen the plan i am talking about. as he says, we don't talk to him. important of an issue to play games with amounts what's going on and it has to stop. we are debating tonight and there will be in election but when this election is over, there will still be a teamsters union to run. we don't need to run it into the ground tonight just for the sake of elections. we to be looking at the future and that's what we will do on this pension issue. >> thank you. next question? >> as a political reporter, i hear a lot about the twinkling power of organized labor in general across the country. what would you do if elected to boost the power of labor unions to benefit your members? >> mr. zuckerman? >> you have to get out on the
streets and organize them. we are money not putting it where deserves, we have to organize and reach out to folks. that should be the number one priority. i've got three priorities -- that i think are very important. one is to fix the pension problem and two is to rid the teamsters union of corruption and three is organize them. those are the top three things that need to be done. if we do that, i think we stand a chance of success. the way we are doing it now, not many people want to join the teamsters union because of all the things i just said. everybody knows it's out there and everybody knows there is a reputation out there. it's very difficult to organize. we got to change that mindset to make people want to be in the teamsters union. i tell the story a lot because i think it's important. ago, i joined the teamsters union. i did to look at them guys in the trucks and freight trucks
and i admired them guys. they had everything. good wages and benefits and job security and they had vacation time and they had a boat and their driveway. they went home at a decent hour at night and they had it all. i wanted that. today it's not like that and we've got to get that back. >> mr. hall? i still admire teamsters and i still admire this organization. in terms of your question, it's one of the things that we are not just talking about a presidential race. we are talking about members of congress and the state level. one thing we're doing is trying to operate more the state level because we know nothing will happen in congress will stop they cannot agree on what day it is. a lot of the action and politics is at the state level and that's why we are gearing up and having meetings with their activists around the country and we will invite you to, fred.
and we are trying to work on some of the legislation at the state level so we are building power amongst our members. that's what we have to do to get there. we will not get there through traditional means of dealing with congress. >> mr. zuckerman? >> i appreciate the invite. for years and years, i have not been invited to anything. not even return my phone calls or letters or whatever else. >> that's all i've got. thank you, now we will move to mr. harrelson -- mr. meyerson with the last question for mr. hall. inthere has been an upsurge worker mobilization on the streets in the last couple of years in the fight for 15 and a lot of low-wage workers mobilizing. none of the unions involved in that have been able to translate that into membership gains. it's really hard.
organizing the private sector is really difficult right now. is there any way the teamsters can play a greater role in these mobilizations? to you see any possibility of translating some of that energy into real gains for the teamsters down the line? do and as i said, we partner with lots of other unions on a daily basis. i think that is what the ways. one of the ways of is building power is getting more people in this country who have the respect and desire to join unions. it will not happen overnight and we knew in the fight for 15 started, it will not result in a lot of new membership now but it builds on that progress. ubsers and their average part-time rate is $14.98 but if you plug in her benefits,
it's $31 per hour so we use that as an example to inspire people work and go to the boss and that's what we have been trying to do, to give them, to empower them at to go to the boss and amended and be willing to stand up for it. it will not happen in the next year or two but we are making progress on that issue and will continue to do that. >> the teamsters union administration is to change their focus on the mergers and rating of other unions. we not going out to the public sector to organize those folks. under my administration, that's exactly what we will do. the public folks need representation we will get all but we cannot neglect our core industries which we have done. critical thatly we do that or we are going to lose our core industries.
>> mr. hall, 30 seconds? again, i continue to hear about core industries and i continue to tell you that we have organized more of the core industry than we have in the past 12 years than in the previous 30. it has just not caught on in fred's local yet. he has more resources than most local and i think he is organized 108 locals in the last five years. during that time, there were four companies that said they wanted out of the union. i'm assuming there was no representation. >> we will now move to the closing statements. mr. hall go first and mr. zuckerman will go last. you have two minutes. >> i am proud of the union. fred might be angry and you have seen it but i think we have a great union.
we are responsible for keeping people in the middle class and moving them up. we have issues like pensions that we've got to continue to work together on regardless of who wins this election. we don't need to have scorched inth to destroy this union the campaign. we need to let the members vote and i would urge all of our members to vote. we need to talk about the real issues and pensions are real issue. guy, herunning with a lost his own election. the people to know them best voted against them by 70% in his own local and now he's running for general treasurer. fred has played games of these contract for political purposes and it's a shame. he's got his running mate who signed up saying they would endorse their supplement and it was great and we found some e-mails the other day saying we
are trying to sell it. they just played politics with it and lied to the members and said they did not do it. he talks about corruption but he has not answer the question yet. in my local, that would be an easy decision if we had a steward who committed battery and was found guilty. we would remove him and we have not heard what happened there. he has taken money from somebody in rhode island, one of the delegates in one of his running mate people who retaliated against another member and got them disciplined. that's been with this union is about. it's about us all working together. this union is about continuing to have the best contracts in the labor movement which we do and it's about working to solve the problem that face us. i thank you for the opportunity to be here and i ask you regardless of who you will vote for, cast your ballot. >> mr. zuckerman, two minutes. a record ofrun on
17 years of failure and that's why he is not here tonight. the campaign will provide strong contracts in better health care coverage and good pension and retirement benefits. from thean be further truth. a contract in every industry has been got it because of the failed leadership. hall remember ken saying we will not pay for health care and we ended up paying more through a reduction in benefits and using pension contributions to pay for our health care in addition to a retirementncrease in benefits. and now, over 500,000 teamsters in central states, local 707, local 469, new york state and others are at risk of losing their pensions because of the neglect of hoffa to organize and his failure to put participants
into the teamster pension plans and by allowing participating employers to leave the funds. it's time to stop lying to the membership. with this face serious challenges that will never be fixed with an administration that is corrupt, inept, weekend in bed with the employers. our members are willing to fight for a better future. they want leadership to fight with them. it's time had leadership that will stand with the members the sides of the employers. my promise to you is i will get rid of the corruption in our union. commits a crime against the membership has no business being in the leadership position. we will organize in our core industries and increase membership because that is what will strengthen the job security and pensions in those industries. we will find solutions to the multiemployer pension crisis in order to save the pensions of the hundreds of thousands of teamsters who will otherwise lose their pensions because of hoffa.
let's fix the problem standing between us and get a brighter future. thank you. >> gentlemen, thank you very much in this concludes the 20 16th teamster international officer farm. [applause] -- forum i want to thank our audience by. abiding by the rules which has not been easy. i would like to thank our panelists for being here. [applause] i would also like to thank david hovis and jamie horowitz from the press club newsmakers committee. the recording of this debate will be available i atbtvote. org. will let the candidates continue their campaigns and teamster members, look for your ballot in the mail in october. they will be mailed october 6 two all members in the u.s. and canada. yourit back senior cap --
-- mail it back so your vote can be counted, good evening. [applause] host: [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2016] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] >> this afternoon, director of george washington university support management program shares data and perspectives on
the recently completed 2016 summer olympics in rio de janeiro that starts by the 2:00 p.m. eastern on c-span three. also today, the road to the white house coverage continues with democratic vice presidential nominee tim kaine speaking with supporters at a voter registration drive in tallahassee, florida. you can see his comments lie 2:15 p.m. eastern here and c-span. and then a panel of designers and policymakers discuss the impact of climate change on buildings and landscapes, what actions can be taken to help communities adapt to environmental changes and challenges. the event is held at the national building museum here in washington and its live at 5:30 p.m. eastern time also on c-span. today, august 20 six marks women's equality day, day proclaimed every year to commemorate the rights of women on august 26, 1920, the 19th amendment was certified as law. several congressional women were
tweeting about as including new york representative louise slaughter who says -- illinois congressman adam kinzinger posted -- new york congressman carolyn maloney represents parts of manhattan, brooklyn, and queens marking women's equality day by ringing the bell at the new york stock exchange this morning full. . this weekend on american history tv on c-span3 -- the abraham lincoln presidential library foundation for list of book of musings by public figures and ordinary americans celebrating or responding to lincoln's gettysburg address. the editor of gettysburg replies, the world responds to
abraham lincoln's gettysburg address beat passages from the book saturday night at 8:50 p.m. eastern. resin is fromthe the words he has written and the artifacts and documents he has left behind for our posterity. he was a simple yet deeply complex man who looked at complex issues plainly and purely. .e accepted and spoke the truth many believe lincoln transcended all other presidents to have served before him and cents. his great american story has reached and continues to reach , racesborders and oceans and religions, politics and party lines. >> at 10:00 p.m. on real america, the march in washington on august 20 8, 1963, the u.s. information agency found the march on washington for jobs and freedom and produced a documentary for foreign
audiences. this your marks the 40th anniversary of the nasa viking landing on mars at the langley research center, historians recently discussed the viking program which led to the first u.s. spacecraft on mars. surrounding july 20, 1976 were incredibly exciting. unit landed, the team had programmed in to photograph to be taken so that they can be delivered fairly quickly back to earth for the press and nasa to see. at 8:00 p.m. eastern on the presidency, historians look at president harry truman's leadership and how he interacted with three prominent national , former secretary of state madeleine albright talks
about harry truman's commitment to public service has president and vice president. who shouldsomeone have gone to college and should've gone to graduate school and deeply wanted to but could not do it mainly because of his family's economic circumstances. if there's one thing i think he felt strongly was that when he became president, he wanted to help others. one of the ways he did that was to strengthen the community college system. >> for our complete schedule, go to www.c-span.org. q&a - ay night on>> racial lynching per week in the south and it was a brilliant psychological device to hold down a race because if you are black, you are afraid this could happen to you. >> the author talks about his literary career including his lynching.", code the
was following the 1980 one killing of michael donald by the kkk in mobile, alabama. >> michael was a teenager and he was trained to become a brick layer and he is the youngest of seven children and he is home with his mother in their house and his aunt asked him to go out and get a pack of cigarettes and gives them one dollar. -- and out in his old this old buick pulls up behind him. a man pulls out his pistol and orders and into the backseat of the car and he knows when he gets in a car what's going to happen. a black man in alabama, you know. >> sunday night at 8:00 p.m. eastern. >> now a discussion the challenges that lie ahead for the united kingdom following the recent referendum to withdraw from the european union. it's held by the heritage foundation, this is one hour and 20 minutes.
>> hello and welcome to the heritage foundation. i am the assistant director. thank you for joining us all today. i want to take the opportunity to remind everyone to turn off cell phones and anyone watching online, you're welcome to submit questions by e-mailing speaker at heritage.org. hosting today's program is ted drummond, the senior research fellow in anglo american relations in the margaret thatcher center for foreign relations. he is an adjunct professor of strategic studies in the trustee studies program -- in the strategic studies program. he is a graduate of grinnell college and earned a master of
arts in master of philosophy and his doctorate degrees from yell university. university. the subject of his doctoral from empire to " europe, material interests, national identities, and the british policy toward european 1956-1963." thanks very much. it's a pleasure to welcome you all to the heritage foundation here today for this panel on how the.exit, the next step on road to british independence from the european union about three months ago, several of us were here at heritage on a similar panel on brexit. the possibility that person might leave the eu is just that, just a possibility. .oday, however, it's a fact behind me on the screens you
will see how heritage it reacted to the vote on the morning of june 24 by flying the union jack on top of the heritage foundation alongside the stars and stripes. on behalf of the heritage , i would like to congratulate everyone who played a part in that victory." brexit is not get a fact that the lead campaign when the referendum but as of today, but mr. luna european union. the vote of june 23 was in one sense a culmination of a long campaign but in another sense, it was just the start of the process and we are here to talk about that process today. since the vote on june 23, i observed one thing. if there's anything that people like to do is tell stories and since june 23, people in the have beenn britain telling stories about brexit. before the vote, i joked that it was likely to become the new global warming. in other words it would be
blamed for everything that went wrong in the world in your personal life. there was a spate of stories about how brexit was causing the british economy to tank but as the guardian reported yesterday morning, the u.k. economic indicators to five brexit fears. economy is not collapsing. it is actually booming. the much more persistent story is about how brexit is a backlash against globalization. it's funny but i don't see britons traveling less or drinking less tea or raising terrorists are using the internet lester quitting nato or any other international organization. what i do see is british troops standing side by side with american forces as one of the new nato tripwire brigades in poland and estonia. a left on the ignorant seem incapable of recognizing that brexit was not a vote against globalization. it was a vote against specific policies and actions undertaken
by various british governments and the eu that were extremely unpopular. brexit does herald the end of an year in history, the end of the year that began in the late 1950's when britain began to enter a decline. for britain after about 1959, europe is not about broadening its horizons, it was about healing that britain's horizons were narrower. it was about believing that britain's problems began at home and that europe was on the whole better governed than britain was. over the course of the last decade, that belief which was exaggeratedtive -- did not take hold. governmental performance is relative. britain'srather have terrorism problems or france's terrorism problems?
would you rather have the italian debt or britain's debt? greaseou rather have the currency or the pound sterling? would you have -- would you rather have europe's immigrant problems or britain? bureaucrats don't see it this way. the answer to the problem is the same, more europe. the european commission famous for his comment that when it's important, you have to lie, asserted that national borders are the worst thing ever. really? sin, slavery,of and american swimmers in rio, national borders are the worst thing ever? that's an exaggeration. you that although it's a low bar, everyone on this panel today has a tighter grasp on reality.
glad to welcome for speakers at heritage after which we will do some q&a. murray is our first speaker. he is widely published and is the author of several books. he is also a visiting fellow at the u.k. adam smith institute and a board member of the american friends of the u.k. taxpayers alliance and an advisory board member of the young briton foundation. cti coming waso director of research for the u.k. department of transport and received his mba from the university of london and his ma from oxford. bloomfield is director of the freeman association. he is widely published.
he is a british and swiss citizen holds a first-class degree in politics from the university of york and masters degrees from the city university of london and warwick business school. of a roadmapauthor of british brexit which won an award from the institute of economic affairs in london in 2014 as part of their brexit competition. are speaking ian to launch the revised version of their prize-winning essay. commentator is marion tupee. commenting on the wrong our panelist, he was extensively published in articles in almost every leading publication the u.s. and overseas and he received his ba from the
africa andof south his phd in international relations from the university of saint andrews great britain. panel, we arer glad to welcome dr. victoria coates. adviserational security to senator ted cruz and received her ba from trinity college, the one in connecticut, her master's from williams college and her phd in art history from the university of pennsylvania. after blogging on foreign policy in the early 2000 under a pseudonym, she worked for former secretary of defense donald rumsfeld with his memoirs before becoming an advisor to former texas governor rick perry and then senator cruz. earlier this year, she published the history of democracy and 10 works of art. to thisurn it over extremely accomplished and diverse panel for their comments after which we will take some questions.
>> thank you for that gracious introduction. i should clarify for the record that i was not director of research at her majesty's department of transport. i was a lowly executive officer in her majesty's department of transport. it is a delight to me back at heritage today and to share the passion with my excellent co-author and the rest of the panelist to provide helpful perspective. and i are releasing the updates to our brexit prize runner-up submission. hte gordian knot was a fabled not in asia minor so complex that no one could unravel it.
in many ways, that is the perfect analogy for the situation in which britain now finds itself. for 40 years, it hasn't find itself more and more into the tangle of institutions, laws, and regulations that is called the european union. british people have now spoken and they want out. her majesty's government find itself having to on entangled that not but this time, there is no alexander to slice it open with one swish of the sword. neither rory or i will discuss the merits of brexit today. that discussion was for the campaign and it has been settled by the vote of the british people. you can talk about legal challenges all you wish but the political reality which has been accepted by the new prime minister is that the british people give them the choice and shows brexit. makes itot to say that could not prove to be a disaster. it could if her majesty's
government makes all the wrong decisions. a britain that shuts up shop in the rest of the world and retreats into some idea of splendid isolation will surely be of poor place. of free market economics tells us that. there are forces in british politics that want to return us to the economic conditions of the 1970's. those of us old enough to remember those times could tell them they are stark raving mad for wanting that. they are unlikely to listen. that is white rory and i believe it is important for the new ministry and the brexit to set out quickly the vision of an open, welcoming ontain, one founded well-established principles of free trade and free enterprise. it will attract investment from and to business on favorable terms with the entire world. not just a little corner of it called europe.
what do we think needs to be done? how can her majesty's government cut that not an set up on the road to becoming a successful economy as britain was in the olympics. first, we believe her majesty's government has to invoke article 50 of the eu treaties as a matter of basic and -- adherence to international law. to start making new deals well still a member of the eu by its own rules would be a serious breach of that the in a convention and would deservedly make it in a pariah. we must be certain what this means. mean, according to article 50, the end of the application of the treaties and protocols thereto in the state concern from that point on. it is an irrevocable step. it is imperative that they have their ducks in a row. when i majesty's government invokes article 50, the u.k. and the european council will ago
the terms of the exit deal, not the commission although the commission may act on behalf of the council but the responsibility is given to the european council. that will almost certainly include the phasing out of the application of eu programs to the u.k., the state and directions for third parties and the status of u.k. and eu nationals resident in other jurisdictions. and doesly negotiating not mean the deal is binding. article 50 requires the consent of the eu parliament to any deal. while the council is likely to be pragmatic because it is composed of the governments of member states with a lot to lose in the event of a bad deal, parliament may prove more ititical in its approach and could prove vindictive. in that sense, the u.k. in the eu are stuck in a classic prisoner's dilemma -- there are political reasons what you said my preferred to see the other side sink but the better
outcome for both will occur if they cooperate. --'s hope the eu rated leaders realize this and the u.k. leaders are not tempted to ignore the realities on the ground. turning back to what her ,ajesty's government must do the first thing domestically will be the repeal of the various acts of parliament that have entrenched the treaties of the european union into british law. firstt is really just the step, the vast bulk of the knot is made up of a huge number of laws and regulations, primary and secondary legislation, that have been encoded into british law as a result of the treaties in the eu directives. , asaling the entire lot desirable as that may sound, is probably neither feasible or desirable. plenty of it would have been encoded anyway, perhaps in a different form.
some of it represents commitments to the global commitment. there has been the contractors of gold plating regulations where they would be made more onerous. some have suggested that parliament should look at all of these together and proposed a great repeal bill or something similar. this would swamp all other parliamentary activity thanks to the sheer volume of the laws concern. we don't actually know how many eu related laws there are. between 19 98-2 thousand four, germany incorporated 750 directives and 18,187 regulations into its legal code just in those six years. many of those were surely minor like relating to specific weights and measures but that underscores the parliament cannot hope to deal with all of those at once. nor can we leave it up to government departments. i am a refugee from the british
civil service and i know how it works. they of interest groups lobbying all the time pushing the effects of regulation in front of their eyes. they rarely consider the unseen ofects of the dispersed cost a regulation around the country. i would wager that set -- but if that's up to government departments, we would to less than 5% of eu regulations repealed that's why we need to look to a different model. suggest that should be the successful model united states has of successfully de- politicizing a contentious issue. realignment and closure commission has a model whereby it takes the decisions to close down military bases out of the hands of congress. the commission looks at the issue in hearings and presents a package of closures to congress
for an up-and-down vote. congress can either accept their it, theyor reject cannot amend it. i think we need something similar with regulatory reduction in the u.k.. that is why we have proposed setting up a royal commission on reductions with a target of say, by 25%g regulations which would provide massive benefit to the u.k. economy and present a package of reforms to parliament. thehese means, we suspect u.k. concert reducing his regulations substantially within five years of exit. the regulations of value could be kept despite the lobbying. one final word is important -- another thing or majesty's government will have to decide quickly is whether or not to apply for membership of the
european economic area, associate membership of the trade area like switzerland or go it alone outside the eea. as ahave described leaving doomsday scenario. some have suggested that some acceptable solution. eea is on acceptable for three reasons for the u.k. side. first, it brings with it a significant re-regulation. britain will be outside of the common agricultural policy and will regain control of its waters. eu regulation continue to apply in this time, the u.k. will actually be without a seat at the table to negotiate the terms. this place to the second problem -- the eu has a democratic deficit which it was a major concern of voters. this will be made worse by the
u.k. just being a member of the eea. eu is likely to not admit the free movement of people over this deal. there is an exception for liechtenstein in the treaties but that is a small straw to .rasp but and is not liechtenstein however much i wish it was. the two main motivating factors behind the vote we know was a desire to take control of britain's laws and borders. the eea may be many options but it is not brexit in these terms. on the eu side britain's membership wouldn't be brexit either. the european parliament has received advice that the correct way to achieve any amembership