Carpenter Dissent Toolkit

How to find, vet, support, and protect carpenters who oppose the Local 57 electrical program

Prepared for: Joint campaign coordinating committee, with a dedicated organizer lead Status: Sensitive operational document. Distribution limited to the lead organizer, the campaign director, and legal counsel.

PART 1 — Why this work matters

A carpenter publicly saying “as a UBC carpenter, I do not support what my union is doing on electrical” is the single most valuable piece of advocacy in this campaign. One credible carpenter on the record is worth more than a hundred IBEW press releases.

The reason is simple: every framing the campaign has built — that this is about leadership, not the trade, that solidarity is the principle, that no carpenter should be vilified — only becomes credible when carpenters themselves carry it. Without internal dissent, the campaign looks like a union turf war. With internal dissent, it looks like what it is: a working-class fight about whether area standards mean anything.

This document covers the work of building that dissent network: how to identify sympathetic carpenters, how to vet them (because UBC infiltration is a real risk), how to support them safely, how to give them tools, and how to protect them when retaliation comes.

PART 2 — Operating principles

These are non-negotiable.

1. The carpenters lead. We support. The campaign does not put words in any carpenter’s mouth. We provide information, talking points, legal protection, and infrastructure. Every public statement is the carpenter’s own. If a carpenter wants to say something the IBEW would have phrased differently, the carpenter’s phrasing wins.

2. Consent is continuous. A carpenter saying yes today does not mean they have said yes forever. They can withdraw from the network, from public participation, from any quote, at any time, for any reason. We don’t argue them back.

3. Their safety is the first concern. Their employment, their family relationships, their standing in their hall, their physical safety. We do not ask anyone to take a risk we have not first done everything in our power to minimize.

4. No transactions. We do not pay carpenters to participate. We do not promise IBEW employment in exchange for cooperation. We do not trade favors. If a carpenter ends up wanting to leave UBC and join IBEW — separately, on the merits, through the Bridge Fund — that is their right; but it is not a quid pro quo and the timing must be clean.

5. No anonymous quotes used without their understanding. If a carpenter wants to be anonymous, they are anonymous in our materials, full stop. We do not publish “a UBC carpenter said X” without that person fully understanding how the quote will appear and signing off in writing.

6. We assume UBC is reading everything. Public-facing campaign assets are written assuming the carpenters’ international has a researcher reading them in real time. Internal dissent network communications are written assuming a forensic adversary will eventually try to read them. Operational discipline is built on both assumptions.

PART 3 — Identifying sympathetic carpenters

A. Where they are

Carpenters who quietly disagree with the Local 57 electrical program exist in larger numbers than most outside the UBC realize. Look for them in:

Senior journeyman carpenters who built their careers before 2007. Many of them remember when craft lines meant something and resent the strategic drift.
Carpenters who came up in the eastern UBC councils or in other regions where the international’s politics played out badly — they have stories.
Carpenters whose family members are IBEW. This is more common than people think. A 30-year carpenter whose son is an IBEW apprentice has a complicated household conversation about Local 57 every week.
Carpenters who have lost work to Local 57’s electrical undercutting through bid competition where their crew was outbid because the contractor had cheap electrical.
Women carpenters and carpenters of color who experienced UBC institutional politics differently than the majority and are sometimes more willing to question.
Retired carpenters. Free of retaliation risk, often deeply principled, and (importantly) often respected by current members.
Carpenter apprentices in their final year, who have completed enough of the program to feel invested in the trade but have not yet become structurally dependent on institutional politics.

B. How they surface

Active outreach is more effective than waiting. Methods:

1. Through IBEW members’ personal networks. Every IBEW member knows at least one carpenter — a brother-in-law, a high school friend, a neighbor, a former coworker. Ask. Quietly.

2. Through retired-member networks. Retired union members across the building trades talk to each other. Approach retired IBEW leaders and ask them to make introductions to carpenters they know personally.

3. Through allied trades organizers. Sheet metal, plumbing, ironworker, and operating engineer organizers in the same region often have carpenter relationships. Quiet, peer-to-peer introductions work where direct outreach does not.

4. Through community institutions. Faith communities, neighborhood associations, AA/recovery groups, school PTAs. People who know each other in non-work contexts can have conversations about work that don’t happen on the jobsite.

5. Through public moments. Watch comment sections on local labor stories, letters to the editor, social media engagement on union pages. A carpenter posting “this isn’t right” on a local news story about Local 57 has self-identified.

6. Through the campaign’s own intake. A small but real percentage of intakes will come from carpenters — sometimes by mistake, sometimes because they are gathering information, sometimes because they actually want to talk. Train the intake coordinator to handle these conversations with patience and zero pressure.

PART 4 — Vetting

UBC has organizers, researchers, and (almost certainly) at least one person whose job will include surfacing the campaign’s internal sources. Assume infiltration attempts. Vet accordingly.

A. The three-meeting rule

No carpenter enters the dissent network’s encrypted channel after a single conversation. The minimum sequence is:

Meeting 1: Initial contact. A short, no-commitment conversation. The organizer listens more than talks. Goal: understand who this person is, why they reached out, what they want.

Meeting 2: Information sharing. The organizer shares the campaign’s public materials and the campaign’s principles. The carpenter shares their context. No requests are made. Goal: establish a shared understanding of the situation and the campaign’s posture.

Meeting 3: The network invitation. If the prior two meetings produced trust on both sides, the organizer explains the dissent network’s structure, operational rules, and what membership requires. The carpenter is given at least 48 hours to decide whether to accept.

Skip steps at your peril.

B. Vetting questions (asked, not interrogation)

Across the three meetings, the organizer should learn:

How long the person has been a carpenter; when and how they got in
Where they have worked; with whom; their reputation
Whether they have IBEW family or close personal connections
Why they oppose the Local 57 electrical program
Whether they have any current grievance with UBC leadership that is unrelated to the electrical question (legitimate grievances are fine; people with unrelated axes to grind are higher risk)
What level of participation they want (private support, named participation, public testimony)
What they are afraid of, specifically

If something doesn’t add up — vague employment history, unwilling to specify dates, evasive about their carpenter local — slow down. Do not invite to the network.

C. Red flags

Slow down or pause an invitation if any of these surface:

Eagerness to be in inner circles fast
Asking detailed questions about other dissent network members
Asking about campaign internal finances, strategy, or staffing
Inconsistencies in employment or background
Aggressive or transactional posture (“I’ll help you if you…”)
A carpenter who claims to know UBC leadership’s plans in unusually specific detail
Pressure to meet at unusual times or unusual places
Refusing to be reached at a verifiable phone number or address

None of these are automatic disqualifiers. Each is a signal to take more time before granting trust.

D. Background verification

For carpenters who will participate publicly (named, on the record), basic verification is appropriate:

Confirm carpenter local membership through publicly available means (events attendance, social media, mutual contacts)
Cross-check employment history claims through visible jobsite history
Confirm contact information matches public records

Verification is light-touch and never invasive. The goal is to confirm what the person told us, not to investigate them.

PART 5 — The dissent network: structure and rules

A. Communication channel

Primary platform: Signal.

Signal-encrypted group chat or, for larger networks, Signal channels with limited write access
Disappearing messages enabled (default: 4 weeks)
All members verified by safety number when added
No phone numbers shared outside the channel
Members use first names only by default in the chat; identifying information shared only when necessary

Backup platform: Element/Matrix self-hosted, if the network grows beyond Signal’s practical group size or if additional structure (rooms by topic) is needed. Not WhatsApp, not Slack, not Discord, not Telegram.

Email: Avoid. Email is fine for one-off documents (the campaign’s public materials, news links), but anything that should not become a public exhibit in a future lawsuit does not belong in email.

B. Channel structure

For networks up to ~30 carpenters:

One general channel for shared updates
One smaller channel for active participants (those willing to take steps inside their hall, write letters, etc.)
Direct messages for individual support

For networks 30+:

General channel becomes announcement-only (organizer posts)
Topic channels: “Inside UBC actions,” “Public statements & quotes,” “Documents & links,” “Support requests”
Active participants in a smaller working group channel

C. Operational rules (posted as a channel pinned message)

THIS CHANNEL IS:

  - A peer network of UBC carpenters who oppose
    the Local 57 electrical program
  - A place to share information, coordinate
    internal UBC actions, and support each other
  - Encrypted, with messages set to disappear

THIS CHANNEL IS NOT:

  - A secret. Assume your participation could
    eventually become known. Act accordingly.
  - A place to discuss anything illegal
  - A place to share UBC documents you are not
    legally entitled to share
  - A place to identify or target individual
    carpenters by name in negative terms

  Discuss leadership decisions. Do not attack
  individuals.

WHEN IN DOUBT:

  - Do not screenshot
  - Do not forward
  - Do not name a fellow member outside this
    channel without their explicit permission

  Members may leave at any time. Notify the
  organizer or simply exit; no questions asked.

D. What gets shared and what doesn’t

Shared:

Campaign public materials
News stories
Talking points
Resolution language
Carpenter rank-and-file experiences (general, not identifying)
Strategic discussion about internal UBC actions
Support and solidarity

Not shared:

Names of campaign staff
Names of campaign donors or contractor partners
Information that would identify a specific Local 57 electrician contemplating transition (their identity is theirs, not network gossip)
Documents that are confidential to UBC (a sympathetic carpenter has access to internal UBC materials; we never ask them to share those, and we do not accept them if offered, except where they document a violation of law and are routed through counsel)
Anything internal to the campaign that has not been cleared for sharing

PART 6 — Tools for carpenters inside UBC

The dissent network’s value comes from what its members can do inside their own union. These are the tools we provide.

A. Talking points for hall meetings

Plain, defensible, hard to attack. Each carpenter chooses what fits their voice; they are not scripts.

On the principle:

“I’m a carpenter. I’ve been a carpenter for [N] years. I’ve never thought it was our job to undercut another trade. That’s not how I learned this work.”

On the practical case:

“If we set the precedent that one union can sign below another trade’s standard, we are inviting the next employer to do it to us. I do not understand the long game.”

On the specific arrangement:

“I have read the Local 57 electrical wage and benefit numbers. They are below the area electrical standard. Anyone can look this up. I want my union to be honest about that.”

On the workers:

“The electricians under Local 57 are not the problem. Many of them are kids who took a union job because they wanted to do right by their families. They deserve the full rate for their craft. That doesn’t take away from carpenters.”

On the leadership:

“I’m not attacking my international. I’m asking my international a question I think every carpenter should be asking: why are we in the electrical trade at below-rate wages? What is the strategy? What does it cost us in solidarity with other unions long term?”

B. Resolution language for UBC local meetings

For carpenters willing to introduce internal resolutions at their UBC local meetings. Phrased to be procedurally hard to dismiss.

MOTION FOR DISCUSSION AT [UBC LOCAL] MEMBERSHIP MEETING

  WHEREAS our local has long understood that defending
  the area standard of every craft strengthens the
  area standard of our own;

  WHEREAS the United Brotherhood of Carpenters
  currently represents electrical workers in the
  St. Louis region under agreements that pay below
  the established electrical area standard;

  WHEREAS this arrangement has come under public
  criticism from other building trades and from
  electrical workers themselves;

  BE IT MOVED that this local respectfully requests
  the Mid-America Carpenters Regional Council to
  provide the membership with:

  1.  A detailed comparison of Local 57 electrical
      wages and benefits to the IBEW area electrical
      standard;

  2.  A statement of the international's policy
      regarding signing below another trade's
      established area standard;

  3.  An assessment of the long-term effect of the
      current arrangement on UBC's relationships
      with other building trades unions and on
      the principle of solidarity across crafts.

  BE IT FURTHER MOVED that this local schedule a
  discussion of these matters at a future
  membership meeting.

A motion of this kind, even if voted down, generates a paper trail showing that the question was asked inside UBC.

C. Letter templates

Letters from members to UBC leadership questioning the program. We provide template language; the carpenter adapts and signs in their own voice.

[Carpenter's letterhead or plain]

[Date]

[UBC International / Regional Council leadership]

Brothers and Sisters,

I have been a member of the United Brotherhood of
Carpenters for [N] years. I write today because I am
troubled by the arrangement under which our union
represents electrical workers in the St. Louis region
through Local 57, at wages and benefits below the
established electrical area standard.

I respect the work our leadership does. I am not
writing to attack anyone. I am writing as a member
in good standing to ask three questions:

1. What is the rationale for signing electrical
   agreements below the established area standard
   of the electrical trade?

2. What is our union's policy on signing below
   another trade's established area standard in
   the same geographic region?

3. How does this arrangement affect our long-term
   relationships with other building trades and
   the principle of solidarity that our union
   has historically defended?

I would appreciate a written response. I intend to
raise these questions at upcoming local meetings.

In solidarity,

[Name]
[UBC Local]
[Member since: ]

D. Public statement options

For carpenters willing to be named publicly. Always reviewed by counsel before publication.

Option 1: Short solidarity statement (lowest exposure)

“I am a UBC carpenter, and I support the principle that no union should sign below another trade’s established area standard.” — [Name], UBC Local [#], member since [year]

Option 2: Direct critique (moderate exposure)

“I am a UBC carpenter. I do not support my union’s arrangement of representing electrical workers at below the established electrical area standard. I believe it is wrong on its own terms and will hurt us in the long run.” — [Name], UBC Local [#], member since [year]

Option 3: Full op-ed (highest exposure) A 600–900 word op-ed in the carpenter’s own voice, drafted with editorial support, placed in a regional paper or trade publication. Reserved for the most senior, most secure participants — usually retirees or members with strong external credibility.

PART 7 — Protection and retaliation response

A. Anticipating retaliation

UBC retaliation against an internal dissenter could take any of these forms:

Informal social pressure within the hall
Loss of preferred dispatch assignments
Discipline for trumped-up infractions
Trumped-up internal union charges
Personal attacks in person, online, or to family
Calls to the carpenter’s employer to inquire about their conduct
In rare cases, threats or physical intimidation

The dissent network’s job is to anticipate, document, and respond to all of the above.

B. Pre-incident preparation

For each network member, before any public action:

Document baseline. Save current employment status, dispatch history, dues status, and any disciplinary record. This is the carpenter’s own record, kept by the carpenter, in case they need to demonstrate retaliation later.
Identify counsel. A labor lawyer who can be reached on 24 hours’ notice. The campaign maintains a referral list.
Family briefing. The carpenter’s spouse or closest family member should know what they are doing and why, and should know how to reach the campaign organizer if something happens.
Communication plan. Pre-set protocol for what the carpenter does if something starts happening: who they call first, what they document, what they say (or don’t say).

C. Incident response

If retaliation begins:

Within 24 hours:

Carpenter contacts the dissent network organizer
Organizer connects them with counsel
Documentation begins (dates, times, witnesses, communications)
Family is informed if not already

Within 72 hours:

Counsel assesses legal posture (UBC internal procedure exhaustion, NLRB ULP if applicable, civil claims if applicable)
Campaign committee notified
Decision: public or private response

Within 7 days:

If public response chosen: coordinated statement, with the carpenter’s consent
If private response chosen: documented complaints filed through appropriate channels
Bridge Fund and legal aid resources made available regardless of the carpenter’s IBEW status

D. The non-abandonment principle

The campaign commits, in writing, that any carpenter who experiences retaliation in connection with their participation in the dissent network will not be left to face it alone. This commitment is real and is backed by the Bridge Fund and the campaign’s legal aid budget.

A carpenter who experiences retaliation severe enough to threaten their employment is eligible — at their option — for full Bridge Fund support in transitioning to IBEW work, with the same wage floor, healthcare gap coverage, and pension grant available to Local 57 electricians. This is offered, not required.

The credibility of every future ask we make of carpenters depends on whether we kept this promise to the first ones who said yes.

PART 8 — Coordination with the wider campaign

The dissent network is coordinated with — but operationally separate from — the rest of the campaign.

The dissent network knows about, but does not run:

Bridge Fund operations
Federal complaint filings
Press relationships
Direct organizing of Local 57 electricians

The rest of the campaign knows about, but does not run:

Membership and activities of the dissent network
Internal UBC actions
Specific identities of network members (only the dedicated organizer and the campaign director know)

Touch points:

Weekly written summary from the dissent organizer to the campaign director (high-level, no identifying details)
Monthly review with legal counsel
Quarterly review with the full campaign coordinating committee (anonymized aggregate only)

This separation is not because we distrust each other. It is because compartmentalization is what protects the network members. If only the dedicated organizer knows the full network membership, only one person needs to be careful with that information.

PART 9 — Lead organizer profile

The person who runs this network is the most consequential single hire on the campaign. Profile:

10+ years of building-trades organizing experience, ideally including time inside UBC or another international with similar internal politics
Demonstrated capacity for confidentiality (verifiable through references)
Strong emotional intelligence; this work is at least as much pastoral as political
Comfortable with technology (Signal, encryption, basic operational security)
Not currently in a leadership role inside any UBC entity (conflict)
Geographically based in the region (this is field work, not remote work)
Compensated at a rate that reflects the difficulty: senior organizer scale, with hazard pay if exposed to threats

Reports to the campaign director only. Has direct access to counsel.

This toolkit is a working operational document. Specific tactics, vetting protocols, and protection measures should be reviewed by counsel and the lead organizer before deployment. The dissent network’s value is fragile; it depends on absolute trust, which depends on absolute discipline in how this work is done.