of work hours and suspension and termination rates fees and backdues for rein-itiation. This facially race neutral practice ignores the fact of discrimination — treating the subset of nonwhite journeymen who were subjected to discrimination during the years 1981 through 1994 as if the discrimination never happened — as if it has had no financial impact on these journeypersons. The union should not be allowed to extract fees and backdues from nonwhite journeymen who were suspended or terminated from the union as a result of the union’s discrimination. Any other result would enable the union to profit from its unlawful conduct in failing to comply with the court’s orders. See International Union, United Mine Workers v. Bagwell, 512 U.S. 821, 829, 114 S.Ct. 2552, 129 L.Ed.2d 642 (1994) (<HOLDING>); United States v. United Mine Workers of
recognizing the inherent power of the court to coerce compliance with its orders holding that civil contempt is designed to coerce the defendant into compliance with the courts order or  compensate the complainant for losses sustained holding that a civil contempt defendant has a right to a jury trial when the act of contempt was not committed in the presence of the court and when the incarceration is in part punitive holding that  105 authorizes bankruptcy courts to impose sanctions for civil contempt to compel compliance with a court order or compensate parties for losses caused by noncompliance holding that section 105a facilitates compliance with the bankruptcy code and the bankruptcy courts orders and compliance is one of the central goals of civil contempt sanctions