Audit Committee Report 1994

Audit Committee Members :
Geoff Kropel - Ann Arbor 
Deke Motif Nihilson - San Francisco
Maile Pickett - Santa Cruz

Introduction 

	The 1994 Audit Committee met over Halloween weekend October 29-30
1994 at the General Headquarters office in San Franciso. We were
responsible for auditing the IWW books for the fiscal year July of 1993 to
June of 1994. FW Bill Meyers our union bookeeper provided an especially
detailed and well prepared spread sheet. This spread sheet incorporated
suggestions from last year's audit committee that there be breakdown
accounting according to several different categories such as dues
received( max., min.,and reg.), office administration, wages, taxes,
literature, convention, organizing funds, general defense committee funds,
Industrial Worker expenses, office supplies and services etc. Using this
information as a starting point we conducted the audit along three general
axes; 

 I.) Checking the balances on the spreadsheet against the actual balances
in the three different I.W.W. bank accounts. 
 II.) Going through checks and deposit slips and receipts and other
records in the Clearing House files to see that expenditures on the spread
sheet corresponded to actual checks written and deposits made.  III.)
Comparing income and expenditures from spreadsheets over the last three
years to gain an overall sense of the fiscal trends of the union. 


I. - II.

The balances of funds on the books matched the balances appearing on the
actual bank statements. Canceled checks to the appropriate parties and
receipts for expenditures were indeed locatable for the randomly selected
transactions we looked at, and these expenditures in turn corresponded to
their proper categories on the spread sheet. 

Overall we found that the financial transactions of the union have been
well documented and honestly accounted for. There are to our knowledge no
real discrepancies or oversights in the records for this fiscal year. 


III.) THREE-YEAR TRENDS


One of the three segments the Audit Committee decided to do as part of our
work was to go over the Fiscal Year (FY) statements for the last three
years, in order to get a better sense of how the Union, and its General
Administration, have handled the expenditure of economic resources. We
also looked at income. While strictly speaking this sort of long range
analysis is not something we're demanded to do by the Constitution, we
felt that this sort of look at Union finances would be to the benefit of
the entirety of the membership. It should be noted that this particular
section of the Audit Committee report was mainly compiled by FWs Deke
Nihilson and Maile Pickett and thus incorporates analysis and
recommendations mainly representative of these two Audit committee
members. Notes and recommendations from FW Geoff Kropel appear in the
following section. 
	
It is apparent to us that, in general, Union resources have been expended
over time according to the wishes of the membership, as expressed in
referendum. We say "in general" because we did not pore over the last
three year's worth of referenda, but instead feel confident in our grasp
of the Union's will thus expressed over the last three years. As with all
things, there's good news, and bad. 

First, the good news: 

DUES INCOME, by FY, all categories excluding initiations and assessments
-----------

FY 1991-2 -->  $15,915.31
FY 1992-3 -->  $13,715.68
FY 1993-4 -->  $19,234.33

We see this as a distinct trend towards growth, as measured by members who
pay their dues on any sort of regular basis. Assessment stamp sales
increased as well, especially in the fiscal year under our direct
jurisdiction.  A mitigating factor is that Initiation income held steady,
which implies that people aren't joining any faster, just paying dues
longer. Overall, this means that our membership is increasing, and that is
an unmitigated Good Thing. 

The IWW's Lit operations have consistent income figures for all three
years-- about $4,000. Though we expended more on lit operations than we
brought in for all three years, Lit has the smallest income/outlay ratio
gap of any project in the Union, and we feel that this speaks well of our
Lit operations. While we couldn't help but notice all the thousands of
dollars expended on a Songbook that has never appeared for distribution,
all those expenditures were outside of our FY, and thus we do not feel we
have the power, in this context, to demand an accounting. But we do
wonder. 

IW income held steady all three FY's too, at around $4000. IW expenditures
have mushroomed meanwhile, but the IW Co-ordinator has acknowledged the
failure of the IW Growth Plan passed last year, and committed to an outlay
of no more than three times the income from IW publication. Further, as
the question is currently being put directly to the Union for a vote, we
feel that this category of deficit is under the control of the membership. 

The General Defense Committee, whose accounts have been closed out upon
the expenditure of the $25,000 granted to FWs Bari and Cherney to pursue
justice in the wake of the assassination attempt they endured, has
flatlined in the past FY, both in terms of income as well as of
expenditure. All monies are accounted for. 

Our income total has declined somewhat, but only by average. It held
steady over the last FY, from the year before, at around $40,000.  The
membership growth is there, our public operations hold steady as measured
by income therefrom, but our deficit has a pernicious momentum of its own.
Which brings us to: 

THE BAD NEWS, which has actually been mitigated over the last FY.  We feel
this is in part to the diligently fiscally conservative administration of
this year's GEB and GST Rush. This is elucidated elsewhere (as our period
of scrutiny overlaps two administrations). However, even with this new
fiscal responsibility in evidence, the deficit has steadily grown,
especially as surrounds our two union-wide projects-- the IW and GHQ. This
is the fault of no single administrator-- but instead seems the result of
a combination of factors. These factors include: 1) The lack of any sort
of overall budget for the yearly operations of the union.  2) The lack of
any ceiling or even general guidelines for what we as a union agree
constitutes an acceptable level of expenditure for such things as
maintaining a centralized clearinghouse. 3) The use of general referendum
proposals in lieu of a comprehensive budget thus eliminating the ability
to collectively prioritize our overall needs; in other words, our voting
patterns as a union may be unaccountable and or contrary (without a budget
or set of priorities) to our actual long term organizational purpose as a
revolutionary movement. For example; the expenditure of funds for a new
office copier, computer, and 2-color printed letterhead may or may not be
justified when considered alongside other needs at this crucial moment in
time, yet we have no real apparatus for comparatively evaluating or
discussing these types of expenditures alongside other referendum
proposals. 

It is true that our gross expenditures over the last FY have in fact been
reduced by almost 30%. This mitigates as much as the deficit itself
aggregates. But by what means have we accomplished this? The answer to
this question concerns us. 

In FY 1992-3, this Union spent $17,372.08 on activities officially

categorized as Organizing. We further believe that the figures show, in
the FY under our scrutiny, real and promising progress being made on the
membership front. In FY 1993-4, the total of funds expended on official
Organizing activities (the second of our three stars) was $2000.  Last
year's Audit Committee expressed a concern that of all funds expended that
FY, only "less than 16%" of monies spent that FY were for the

purpose of organizing. This FY, that figure has dropped to $60 (sixty
dollars), LESS THAN 2%. 

This is in no way an indicator of malfeasance on the part of anyone in the
General Administration of our Union, but rather, it reflects the
expenditure of funds as set through recent referenda, which is (after all)
the closest thing we have to an actual budget process. However, we can't
help but notice how close the amount our Union saved on organizing is to
the actual decrease in the Union wide deficit. 
 
We find this disturbing, as such "savings" may undercut our ability to
acheive future growth. An un-tilled field yields little harvest.  We are
concerned that apparent savings now will actually undermine our potential
for future benefit, that our deficit decrease this year is one of those
"quick fixes" you've been hearing so much about, the kind that leave the
mess to be cleaned up later.  We feel we must ask ourselves, as members
all equally responsible for the use of union money, if we are to cut
expenditure; is financial support for organizing efforts the best or only
area for spending reduction? 

This year the expenses for the maintenance of a centralized clearinghouse
totaled $53,183.37. This figure has actually risen slightly over the last
three years. There is currently no system for evaluating such expenditure
in relation to other overall priorities for our union. While we found no
mal-intent or foul play on anyone's part, we feel a need to point out this
ongoing discrepancy between the level of unevaluated expenditure on
administrative functions and the level of highly scrutinized and regulated
expenditure on organizing drives, not to mention the level of funding upon
which most branches are expected to function. 

We respectfully submit our deep concern over these phenomena to the whole
of the membership for further contemplation and discussion. As are so many
others in this depression-scale disaster of global-capitalist economy, we
may be going without food in order to pay the rent.  Being fat in the rain
is no better but we must ask ourselves are these the only options? We the
authors, as fellow workers and former branch treasurers must wonder if
there isn't a way to accomplish fiscal responsibility without sacrificing
our future growth and ability as a strong and defiant revolutionary labor
union. 

Yours for the struggle,

Maile Pickett


Deke Motif Nihilson


Geoff Kroepel's Notes for the FY 1993-4 
IWW Audit Committee Report

Having examined the Wells Fargo checkbook I found the dispersals to be in
order and accounted for. The canceled checks matched and all the related
documents were present. All funds were well accounted for. 

The following are recommendations for the future: 

Branches who receive organizing funds should (please) send receipts to GHQ
and an organizing report. 
   
Branches should scrutinize mailing lists, weed out dead addresses, send
these to GHQ in order to reduce mailing expenses. 

Keep sending detailed monthly financial report to the GST and GEB chair. 

Keep up the excellent bookkeeping and record info. 

Good financial hygiene is very important for IWW health. 

Keep financial reports as clear and legible as they are now or better. 

Much thanks to FW Bill Meyers for such attention to the books! It made our
job that much easier. 

Sincerely,

Geoff Kropel