National Legal and Policy Center
Organized Labor Accountability Project
www.nlpc.org
 The Failure of the LIUNA “Internal Reform Effort”
2. LACK OF INDEPENDENCE
2.1 Coia’s Advocate Becomes Coia’s Prosecutor
From November 1994 to February 1995, criminal defense attorney Robert D. Luskin was retained by LIUNA to lead settlement negotiations of the draft RICO complaint with the goal of limiting DOJ’s involvement and keeping whatever reform effort emerged within the shelter of LIUNA.  Luskin is credited with dreaming up what he calls this “imaginative approach” to union corruption.  In February 1995, Luskin switched sides.  Luskin went from LIUNA and Arthur A. Coia’s advocate to their prosecutor under “internal reform effort.”  It was as if Johnny Cochrane was allowed to take over Marsha Clark’s job and prosecute O.J. Simpson in a quasi-judicial system funded and controlled by O.J. Simpson.

Luskin was able to pull off the switch because DOJ trusted him and put a lot of stock in Luskin’s past, yet very brief, stint as a DOJ attorney from 1980-82.  Further, Luskin was  allowed to lead the “internal reform effort” because Coia and a majority of the GEB trusted him.  How these two opposing groups came to mutually trust Luskin is suspicious and led to many critics’ broader suspicions of the how Coia was able to get this “sweetheart deal” out of DOJ.  This gave rise to several well-documented articles connecting allegations of misconduct between Coia, Bill Clinton and the Clinton DOJ. See: Eugene H. Methvin, “The Clintons and the Union Boss,” Reader’s Digest Apr. 1996; John E. Mulligan and Dean Starkman, “An F.O.B. and the Mob,” Washington Monthly May 1996; and Byron York, “Mob Rules: Bill and Arthur’s Beautiful Friendship,” American Spectator Apr. 1997.

The key here is that Luskin is not truly independent as the DOJ hopes.  How can Luskin go from being Coia’s virtual defense attorney trying to stave off a government takeover and save Coia’s job to a vigorous prosecutor trying bring to Coia to justice?  It defies common sense.  Luskin did bring charges against Coia in November 1997 -- nearly three years after he took over the “internal reform effort” -- allegedly for pre-1993 corruption.  However, to date, the exact charges have not been disclosed and the result of the internal quasi-trial have not been revealed.  Further, critics will be astonished if Coia receives a true punishment.  It is anticipated that Coia will keep his plush post with, if anything, a minor slap on the wrist or he will be cordially asked to leave the union will a platinum parachute in tow.
 

Return to the index of this report.

Organized Labor Accountability Project