Please Follow us on Gab, Minds, Telegram, Rumble, Gettr, Truth Social, Twitter
That question looms large in Connecticut where Department of Labor (CT DOL) commissioner Danté Bartolomeo has openly acknowledged ignoring a statute designed to protect union members.
At issue is Connecticut General Statutes Sec. 31-77. This 1959 law requires unions to file verified annual financial reports, make them available to members, and submit them to the CT DOL for safekeeping and possible audit. It was enacted to deter corruption, protect workers’ dues, and hold union leaders accountable. The law also protects taxpayers, who subsidize union activities through paid union leave, administrative costs associated with dues collection, grants, and other state-supported benefits.
For years, however, CT DOL has simply refused to enforce it.
Commissioner’s Contradictions
In an August 2025 letter to Senators Rob Sampson and Stephen Harding, Commissioner Bartolomeo acknowledged the statute but dismissed it as “redundant” because unions already file IRS Form 990s. She further complained that compliance is “burdensome” and rarely requested.
This rationale is indefensible. Commissioners are not empowered to decide which laws are worth enforcing. The General Assembly writes the laws; the executive branch is obligated to carry them out. If Bartolomeo truly believed she had discretion to ignore Sec. 31-77, she would never have asked lawmakers last session for “technical changes.” That request alone proves she knows the law is binding — she has simply chosen not to comply.
Why Federal Filings Aren’t Enough
Federal forms like the 990 or LM-2 provide only limited, high-level data. They don’t detail how union dues are actually spent — such as credit card charges, travel expenses, or questionable reimbursements. More importantly, most public-sector unions — which dominate Connecticut’s workforce — often are not required to file those federal reports at all. LM-2 forms are utilized mostly by private unions with income over $250,000.
That is why Sec. 31-77 is critical. It requires public-sector unions with more than 25 members to file annual financial reports and grants union members — not just federal agencies — the right to obtain a copy and demand an audit. It is a safeguard against fraud and abuse — one that empowers workers directly. To call it “redundant” is to strip workers of one of their most important protections.
A Culture of Lawlessness
The agency’s neglect has bred a culture of disregard. Commissioner Bartolomeo even told lawmakers that “as far as anyone at CT DOL can remember,” no one had ever asked for union financial reports except for me. That is false. At least two Connecticut teachers documented attempts to obtain their unions’ reports, only to be stonewalled by CT DOL’s own legal director.
If the commissioner cannot be accurate when answering sitting senators, what chance does the average union member have of getting a fair shake from her department?
The deeper problem is that years of non-enforcement have created a culture of lawlessness. Most union members don’t even realize they have the right to see financial reports. Most union leaders don’t know they are required to file them. I was a union treasurer myself, and I had no idea of this obligation. Why? Because CT DOL has deliberately normalized ignoring the law.
When the state agency charged with oversight refuses to enforce its own statute, the message to union officials is clear: do whatever you want.
Real Consequences
Union corruption is not hypothetical — it is real, costly, and widespread. Nationally, a U.S. Department of Labor review found more than 2,000 criminal investigations between 2015 and 2024, resulting in over 600 convictions for theft, fraud, and embezzlement. These numbers don’t even capture cases settled internally, resolved through restitution, or buried in civil proceedings.
Connecticut has its own troubling record:
In the UPFFA case, judicial documents revealed that “the court has heard evidence from the local [union] of questionable expenditures from the state union, including personal travel that may not have been reimbursed, suspicious ‘mistakes’ with PAC fund balances, and the admission of a plainly improper loan the state union took (and repaid) from its charitable affiliate.”
The personal travel included flying former UPFFA President Pete Carozza’s girlfriend first class to exotic locations such as Hawaii and to the Caribbean, and repeated mileage reimbursements for Carozza to attend Wolcott Democratic Town Committee meetings, even though Wolcott doesn’t have a paid fire department. Surprisingly, Carozza defended the expenditure as necessary to advocate for firefighters in the town where he lived, despite admitting in open court that he hadn’t attended the other party’s town committee meetings or any other town committee meetings in the state.
The UPFFA was never audited by the CT DOL; as a union president, I was unaware we even had the right to ask. Ultimately, the case was settled before going to trial, with the New Haven Fire Fighters achieving all their legal objectives — securing disaffiliation from the state union and avoiding payment of a year’s worth of back dues.
Despite this, Carozza was later appointed to the State Labor Board by Governor Ned Lamont. None of these abuses were uncovered by CT DOL. Instead, they came to light through courts, national unions, or whistleblowers. That failure of oversight should alarm every dues-paying worker — and every taxpayer who indirectly subsidizes union operations.
This is exactly why Sec. 31-77 exists — and why CT DOL’s refusal to enforce it is so damaging.
A Betrayal of Duty
Commissioner Bartolomeo swore an oath to “faithfully discharge” her duties. That oath does not include exceptions for laws she finds inconvenient. By refusing to enforce Sec. 31-77, she has not only betrayed union members but also undermined the legislature’s authority. The General Assembly passed this statute. Only the legislature can repeal it. When an executive official refuses to enforce it, she is effectively nullifying the law by fiat.
Governor Lamont and Attorney General William Tong share responsibility. Their silence makes them complicit. If the state’s top labor official can ignore a statute, what prevents any agency head from disregarding laws they find inconvenient?
The Path Forward
Union members must not accept this. Their rights under Sec. 31-77 are real, even if CT DOL pretends otherwise. They can request reports, demand audits and — if stonewalled —turn to independent watchdog organizations for help.
The legislature must also act. Instead of repealing or watering down Sec. 31-77, lawmakers should demand the current law is enforced or strengthen it:
This is not about paperwork. This is about accountability, transparency, and the rule of law. Connecticut union members pay hard-earned dues and deserve to know how those funds are managed.
By refusing to enforce Sec. 31-77, CT DOL has deprived workers of their rights. and shielded union leaders from accountability. Until lawmakers reassert their authority and workers demand transparency, the question will remain: What good is a law if it’s not enforced?
Under Commissioner Bartolomeo’s leadership, the answer is troublingly clear: in Connecticut today, not much.
Please join Yankee Institute for a webinar on Sept. 24 at 12pm about how Connecticut’s Department of Labor (CT DOL) leaves workers vulnerable to corruption by failing to enforce laws requiring unions to provide financial transparency. Register here.
Stay updated with the latest in the Constitution State with The CT Centinal
