Protest Decisions

IN RE: Thomas Jones,
Protest Decision 2001 EAD 296
Issued: April 3, 2001
OEA Case No. PR011411ME

Thomas Jones, member of Local 115, filed a pre-election protest pursuant to Article XIII, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the 2000-2001 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election ("Rules"). Jones alleges that University of Pennsylvania managers falsely accused him of campaigning on employer time in an effort to retaliate against him for his campaign activities.

Election Administrator representatives Lisa Sonia Taylor and William W. Thompson II investigated this protest.

Findings of Fact

On January 12, 2001, Jim Bean, the director of operations at the University of Pennsylvania, received reports that employees were campaigning on employer time at the Franklin Building. Bean contacted manager Dave Evangelist and requested that he investigate the matter. As part of the investigation, Evangelist asked Jones' supervisor, Terry Murphy, to inquire into Jones' activities that day.

Management suspected that Jones was involved because campaign literature related to the incident in question was printed on the back of an old "OT" report that was given to union stewards. Jones was a steward at the time the report was handed out and would have received one. It was also reported to management that Jones had previously been seen with one of the leaflets. Jones, however, was not the only employee questioned about his involvement in the incident.

At around 1 p.m., Murphy asked Jones about his whereabouts at noon. Murphy explained why he was asking. Jones said that his lunch break is from 11:30 a.m. to 12 p.m., that between 11:50 a.m. and 12:05 p.m. he was in the managers' office having a conversation with a manager about overtime, and that at 12:15 p.m. he went to the basement of Meyerson Hall to prepare for his afternoon duties. The entire conversation lasted less than 5 minutes.

Murphy was satisfied that Jones was not involved in the incident and communicated this belief to Evangelist. The employer took no action against Jones for the incident.

Analysis

Article VII, Section 11(f) of the Rules prohibits "retaliation or threat of retaliation by the International Union, any subordinate body, any member of the IBT, any employer or other person or entity against a Union member, officer or employee" when directed toward the exercise of any election-related right. See Parisi, P1095 (December 2, 1991). A protest claiming retaliation cannot be sustained unless a threat or an actual act of retaliation is established. Giacumbo, P100 (October 13, 1995), aff'd, 95 EAM 27 (October 25, 1995).

Here, the employer took no action against Jones, and there is thus no factual basis for his claim of retaliation. Accordingly, we DENY this protest.

Any interested party not satisfied with this determination may request a hearing before the Election Appeals Master within two (2) working days of receipt of this decision. The parties are reminded that, absent extraordinary circumstances, no party may rely upon evidence that was not presented to the Office of the Election Administrator in any such appeal. Requests for a hearing shall be made in writing, shall specify the basis for the appeal, and shall be served upon:

Kenneth Conboy

Election Appeals Master

Latham & Watkins

Suite 1000

885 Third Avenue

New York, New York 10022

Fax: 212-751-4864

Copies of the request for hearing must be served upon all other parties, as well as upon the Election Administrator for the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, 727 15^th Street, N.W., 10^th Floor, Washington, D.C. 20005 (fax: 202-454-1501), all within the time prescribed above. A copy of the protest must accompany the request for hearing.

William A. Wertheimer, Jr.

William A. Wertheimer, Jr.

Election Administrator

cc: Kenneth Conboy

2001 EAD 296

DISTRIBUTION LIST (BY UPS NEXT DAY AIR UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED):