Why did TWU Local 100 President John Samuelsen choose to spend 30 million on 2 and a half floors versus buying a whole building? Here are some key points…


With a lack of transparency within TWU local 100 under John Samuelsen’s administration, it is left up to members to draw their own conclusions as to how and why certain decisions are made.

A major question thats circling around crew rooms, bus depots and locker rooms is, “why did the union spend 30 million dollars on 2 and a half floors versus buying a whole building? Here are 5 key points that gives members something to think about…

  1. Harry Wills (Former Chief of Staff under Samuelsen’s Administration) came on Progressive Action podcast to educate the members on the dealings going on under the Samuelsen’s administration.
  2. According to Wills,  John Samuelsen never wanted to purchase the property at 195 Montague st., he was only interested in buying a building, not floors.
  3. Nick Bedell’s (TWU’s education director) college friend from Hunter College was the  realtor on the deal in selling the 195 Montague St. property to the union. Harry Wills also mentioned during his interview that Nick Bedell friend was the realtor on the deal. This wasn’t known by the members prior to Harry mentioning it.
  4. During the process something or someone convinced Samuelsen to not purchase a building, but to purchase 2  and a half floors instead at 195 Montague St.
  5. Samuelsen went through with the deal and purchased the 2 and half floors at Montague St. for 30 million dollars.

There wasn’t a logical reason as to why someone would purchase floors instead of a building, especially to the tune of 30 million. What could have possibly convinced Samuelsen to change his mind? From the points stated above, what do you think?

Feel free to comment.


4 thoughts on “Why did TWU Local 100 President John Samuelsen choose to spend 30 million on 2 and a half floors versus buying a whole building? Here are some key points…

  1. There are E-board minutes that will explain why. They E-board went to all the properties that were in the running. Stop tring to find something in things that aren’t there.


  2. Speak to your department eboard member. The eboard was fully involved in the decision making and they did visit the different choices. The unions first choice was shot down by the International. Get the facts before doing smear pieces. The union has never been so transparent as it has under the current administration. Those are facts. If you disagree, tell me another administration that was more transparent and give examples.


  3. The comments of Samuelsen’s sycophants not withstanding, I believe the main question is, why buy floors instead of a building? NOT what executive board member visited what. The purpose of buying a building that fully services the membership needed to be the priority and not luxury office space. I have no evidence to comment on the legitimacy of the sale, real estate college buddies, etc. But a trade Unionist mindset would put the member’s needs, now and in the future, into the final decision making. Luxury condo office space in a building we don’t own or control is far from that mindset.

    Let me offer this scenario. Suppose a construction Union decides to put a rat in front of 195 Montague to protest scab labor being done on the property. They, in effect, set up a picket line around the entrances. We would have to that cross picket line to get into our own Union Hall. It’s a smaller point but anyone can see the absurdity.

    I believe an ideal Union Hall must have the following major ingredients. It must be accessible to the membership day and night. It must be geographically accessible to ALL members. It must have rent-able commercial and/or retail space for significant additional income. And it must have a large, open general assembly area for members to attend mass meetings. The condo at 195 Montague offers none of the above.

    The real reason for diving into a bad real estate purchase was to show the members at election time, a shiny brochure of their future home for the purposes of neutralizing a hot button election campaign issue in 2012. The purchase of the condominium was done as a means to a political end. Members are now seeing who really benefited from that luxury office space. As with anything else, what’s done in the dark eventually comes to light.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s