The Fork in the River: Independence and the Balance of Power
By Thomas Prislac, Director of Research, Treasurer. Ultra Verba Lux Mentis. 2025
Every river, no matter how vast, depends on balance. Too many dams and the waters stagnate; too few and it floods the valley. Within a labor organization, that balance is maintained through segregation of duties, independence in oversight, and mutual respect between union staff and the elected executive board.
These principles are not abstractions only cared about by vaunted corporate billionaires and their professional handlers. Rather, they are meant to be the engineering that keeps the river alive for any organization.
In accounting and governance, segregation of duties means no single person controls all parts of a transaction. COSO’s Internal Control–Integrated Framework identifies this as a foundational principle under “Control Activities” ensuring that authorization, recording, and custody of assets are distributed across multiple hands.
In the river’s terms, segregation of duties divides the flow into smaller channels, so no one individual can redirect the current unseen.
For a union:
Staff may initiate or process financial transactions.
The Treasurer or executive board must review, approve, and audit them independently.
The external auditors independently verify the integrity of the financial reporting process.
When these roles blend, the river’s clarity turns murky. It is all about the structure. The river must have banks strong enough to contain even the most well-intentioned current.
The AICPA’s Code of Professional Conduct (Section 1.200.001) defines independence as “freedom from relationships that might compromise objectivity.” Independence isn’t personal — it’s positional.
For union governance, independence means:
The Treasurer and Executive Board operate with autonomy in oversight.
The CFO and staff, while essential, remain subject to that oversight.
Auditors — internal or external — must remain free from the influence of either.
Independence allows oxygen to reach the water — ensuring fresh flow, preventing stagnation, and maintaining transparency. Without independence, the river becomes a closed loop where the risk of undetected material contamination increased each fiscal quarter.
The relationship between union staff and elected officers must be one of co-equal authority, not hierarchy.
The Executive Director and professional staff carry operational expertise — they keep the current steady. But elected officers like the Treasurer, President, and Vice Presidents represent the membership. Their authority is derived from the river’s source: the dues-paying members themselves.
When staff fail to respect that co-equal authority — when elected leaders are treated as ceremonial or advisory — the levees of democracy begin to weaken. Power centralizes, and the river narrows under managerial control.
To preserve democracy within the union:
Staff must share information transparently with board officers.
Elected officers must exercise oversight without hostility.
Both sides must understand that accountability is mutual, not adversarial.
As the DOL’s Office of Labor-Management Standards reminds us, union officers are legally responsible for safeguarding funds, regardless of who handles them day-to-day. That duty cannot be delegated away, and it cannot be fulfilled without staff cooperation.
The Treasurer’s work embodies this balance. They stand where the channels meet — between staff operations, board oversight, and member trust. Their independence is the check that keeps the river’s confluence from becoming a whirlpool of unchecked authority.
This is why staff must treat the Treasurer’s authority as equal to the Executive Director’s. The Treasurer’s independence ensures that financial stewardship is shared between the operational and governance sides of the organization — neither dominating the other.
Without that shared respect, the river loses its symmetry, and sooner or later, one bank erodes.
Segregation of duties, independence, and respect for co-equal authority aren’t bureaucratic niceties. They are democratic necessities. They keep the river open, flowing, and visible to all.
COSO provides the engineering: divided roles and internal controls.
AICPA provides the ethics: independence and objectivity.
DOL provides the mandate: officer responsibility for member funds.
Together, they form the hydrology of accountability — ensuring the river never becomes a reservoir of unexamined power.
A healthy union river runs on trust, not control. It requires many hands, many banks, and open eyes along every stretch. Independence does not divide the river; it keeps it alive.
Works Cited
Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).
Internal Control – Integrated Framework (ICIF). Defines principles of segregation of duties and control activities.
https://www.coso.org
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA).
Code of Professional Conduct. Section 1.200.001 – Independence rule.
https://www.aicpa.org/research/standards/codeofconduct.html
U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), Office of Labor-Management Standards (OLMS).
Union Officer Responsibilities and Compliance Resources.
https://www.dol.gov/olms
