Protest Decisions

IN RE: JOEL LEFEVRE,
Protest Decision 2001 EAD 301
Issued: April 12, 2001
OEA Case No. PR022812NE

On February 28, 2001, Local 840 member and former secretary-treasurer Joel LeFevre 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"). He alleges that Local 840, through Trustee Dan Kane, violated the Rules by failing to mail its nomination meeting notice in the proper form or by the deadline required in its local union plan ("LUP") or the Rules; failing to mail a Spanish version of the nomination meeting notice; failing to post the nomination meeting notice or LUP summary at eight major worksites; and failing to conduct its nomination meeting with a quorum of fifteen members in accordance with Section 19(C) of the local's bylaws.[1]

Election Administrator representative David Reilly investigated the protest.

Article II, Section 5(d) of the Rules requires each local union holding one or more nomination meetings to provide its members with notice of the meeting(s) using a specific form provided by our office (EA Form 7). It requires the local to both send this form to its members by first-class mail and to post it on all local union bulletin boards at least twenty-one days before the nomination meeting. Local 840's LUP further requires that election materials be provided in both English and Spanish. Article II, Section 4(g) of the Rules requires that "as soon as possible, but in no event later than seven (7) days after the local union has received the Plan Summary, the Secretary-Treasurer…shall post a copy of the Plan Summary…on all Local Union bulletin boards and shall maintain such posting throughout the entire delegate nomination and election period."

Due to circumstances beyond Local 840's control, its LUP was not approved or received at the local until February 1. The LUP called for its nomination notices to go out that same day, which would have provided the requisite twenty-one days between the nomination meeting date of February 23.

As a result of the delayed receipt of the approved LUP plan, the local was unable to send the required notices to its membership on February 1. Further confusion resulted in staff failing to send or post the notice in its required form (EA Form 7). Rather than the proper nomination notice, LU 840 staff prepared English and Spanish versions of the LUP Summary for mailing to its membership. This LUP Summary did notify LU 840 members as to the date, time, and location of the nomination meeting; the number of delegate and alternate positions; and the requirements and procedures for submitting and accepting a nomination.[2]  The notice was mailed on Monday, February 5, providing only eighteen days before the nomination meeting.

Within seven (7) days of receiving the LUP Summary, Kane directed that English and Spanish versions of the LUP Summary be posted on all local union bulletin boards. Because at least two stewards did not receive the LUP Summaries mailed to them, and one steward did not realize he had to post the Summary, these Summaries were not posted at a few locations.

LeFevre provided no evidence of bad faith on the part of the local union, or of disadvantage to any potential candidates as a result of the substituted, late mailings or missing postings. See, Wenham, 2001 EAD 221 (March 7, 2001) (citing Snow, P368 (March 6, 1996); Young, P426 (March 29, 1996); and Snow, P727 (May 28, 1996)). Rather, evidence shows that Local 840 members were informed as to the nomination date, time, and location and all relevant nomination procedures through the English and Spanish versions of the LUP summaries mailed to them at their homes. LeFevre and his fellow slate member Jack King did not suffer any disadvantage as they were both nominated at the meeting held on February 23. Both were ultimately disqualified, but not because of their failure to understand nomination meeting procedures or the nomination meeting date or time. Instead, their disqualification resulted from LeFevre's lack of good standing to run and because their only nominator, Dolores Felice, lacked good standing to nominate them. LeFevre, 2001 EAD 220 (March 7, 2001). Accordingly, the protest is DENIED.

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 NW, Tenth Floor, Washington, DC 20005 (fax: 202-454-1501), all within the time period 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 301

DISTRIBUTION LIST VIA UPS NEXT DAY AIR: