The union officer who lost last month’s election to become president of AFSCME Local 44 has charged winner Stancil McNair, who crusaded for better pay and working conditions for sanitation workers, of “colluding” with Baltimore’s inspector general.

The charges provided the premise for Patrick Moran, president of AFSCME Maryland Council 3, to nullify the August 23 election and call for a new election of all Local 44 officials, the majority of whom were members of McNair’s reform slate.

Moran has also imposed a gag order on union members, banning them from speaking out publicly about “internal union business,” including about the upcoming October 4 election do-over.

The election nullification and gag order, reported by The Brew last Friday, means that McNair cannot address the media or conduct a public campaign without the risk of being banned from the union.

“They’re trying every means to kick Stancil out,” said a close union observer, who asked not to be identified. “Local 44 has been a closed club run for years by insiders. The last thing they want is for [McNair’s slate] to win.”

Moran, who heads AFSCME Maryland Council 3, and his staff have refused to answer questions about the new election and have blocked Brew reporters from entering the union hall and forbid a reporter to talk to members before the August 23 election.

Unsubstantiated Claims

The union’s actions have left Trevor Taylor, Local 44’s former vice president who signed the protest letter, in a much better position to win the new vote on October 4.

At a Local 44 cookout at Carroll Park last Saturday, he was seen distributing “Trevor Taylor for Local 44 president” literature emblazoned with AFSCME’s logo and forest-green color scheme, sources say.

Taylor’s letter to the AFSCME Judicial Panel accused McNair of maintaining “an unusually close relationship” with Inspector General Isabel Mercedes Cumming, whose office issued a series of critical reports on hazardous conditions at city sanitation yards, which hold the bulk of Local 44’s blue-collar members.

The letter accuses Cumming of using her office “to build a case against AFSCME Local 44,” citing her attempt to subpoena financial records, “alleging fraud without providing substantiated evidence” on the part of the union.

The letter accuses Cumming of using her office “to build a case against AFSCME Local 44.”

“Although the union’s lawyer successfully blocked these attempts, Mr. McNair publicly supported the OIG’s efforts at union meetings and on social media. His actions raise significant questions about his loyalty to AFSCME and his potential role as a collaborator with leadership figures who aim to discredit and undermine the union,” says the letter.

Because a confidential subpoena would not likely be known by Taylor, The Brew asked the union’s lawyer, David Gray Wright, if he drafted this or other parts of the letter, which has a highly legalistic tone, citing, for example, detailed subsections of the AFSCME Constitution.

Wright has so far not responded, and Taylor was not made available to answer questions.

McNair placed the letter on his social media site last night, but otherwise has been unreachable.

“A negative culture”

Tonight Cumming issued the following statement about the letter and the Judicial Panel investigation:

“The mission of the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) includes promoting efficiency, accountability and integrity in city government and providing transparency to the public. As part of a nine-month investigation into the Department of Public Works, the OIG spoke with over 130 employees and found an adverse work environment and negative culture that existed for the last decade within DPW’s Solid Waste Division.

“The workers’ numerous concerns included work conditions, safety, mishandling of injuries, lack of training, issues with their union, and lack of adequate compensation and equity. The section of the OIG’s report regarding the union is attached (see below). The OIG stands behind the accuracy of the report. The OIG has no comment on the letter from the Judicial Panel.”

OIG Findings about Local 44

Issued on March 5, 2025:

“Local 44 is the union for DPW solid waste workers and drivers, while the supervisors are members of CUB. According to the solid waste workers and drivers interviewed, they do not feel supported by Local 44. They explained that Local 44’s presence has been non-existent, and the union has not advocated for the workers in the last few years. One worker opined that Local 44 is absent until something drastic happens, like when a worker dies. A DPW Superintendent stated they attempted to have a Local 44 representative visit the yard to meet with employees, but the representative declined and suggested that employees attend the union meetings.  

“Several DPW executives noted the issues involved with the promotional process for solid waste workers and drivers to the supervisor level. They noted that the Local 44 MOU states that promotions are to be based on seniority and does not allow the best qualified candidate to be hired. Rule 44 of the Civil Service Rules, Seniority, and Promotion, states that if seniority is included as part of the examination, a point system will be used. Based on witness statements, promotions as a result of seniority can lead to a lack of upward mobility and advancement for high-performing employees with leadership potential.

“Numerous employees questioned how the dues paid to Local 44 are utilized and how they support the solid waste workers and drivers. The OIG sent a subpoena to Local 44 for annual financial statements and the expenditures related to DPW’s solid waste workers and drivers. Local 44’s legal counsel responded and, ultimately, did not provide the requested records.

“When asked if Local 44 received many complaints about safety concerns from solid waste workers, a Local 44 representative said they did not, but they were aware of some complaints regarding insufficient water supplies at the Sisson Street Residential Drop-Off Center.

“A Local 44 representative acknowledged that union representatives have not been going out to DPW sites as much as they used to since COVID-19 began. Many workers claimed union meetings were not consistent and said they were not informed of meeting times. When questioned by the OIG, the representative stated that Local 44 holds a meeting for members every 3rd Saturday of the month . . . The representative refused to speak about the election process. Shortly thereafter, the Local 44 counsel informed the Inspector General they would not discuss it with the OIG.

“During the investigation, employees alleged misconduct occurring within Local 44. As instructed by the Local 44 counsel, the OIG has forwarded these concerns to the appropriate entities with jurisdiction for
further investigation.”