IN RE: DENNIS SPEAK, WAYNE RAYBOURN and DAVID BAKER,
Protest Decision 2001 EAD 331
Issued: April 30, 2001
OEA Case Nos. PR022314SO, PR031413SO, PR031614SO, PR040212SO and PR040911SO
See also Election Appeals Master decision 01 EAM 72 (KC)
Dennis Speak, Wayne Raybourn and David Baker, members of Local 41, filed pre-election protests pursuant to Article XIII of the Rules for the 2000-2001 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election ("Rules"). The protests allege numerous violations of the Rules by members of the Phil Young/Jim Hoffa Members First Local 41 delegate election slate (the "YH slate"), and by the Hoffa Unity slate ("Hoffa slate"), against Speak, the secretary-treasurer of Local 41 and the head of the opposing Local 41 delegate election slate (the "DS slate") and its supporters.
Election Administrator representative Dolores Hall investigated the protests. We address the protest allegations seriatim.
Findings of Fact and Analysis
1. Speak alleges that members and supporters of the YH slate violated the Rules by having its supporters, including union stewards, sell or distribute YH slate caps and bumper stickers and other campaign material on the dock, in the office, and in the break rooms of the main office, city dispatch, road dispatch and dock break room at Yellow Freight on company time and while other employees were on company time.
Doug Holly, a hostler on the city dock at Yellow Freight, says that on February 23, 2001, he purchased a YH slate hat, while on the clock, from head union steward and YH slate activist Dan Battles for ten dollars. Holly says he saw an out-of-town road driver with one of the hats on and asked him where he got it. The driver replied that the union steward had them for sale in the break room. Holly says he then went into the break room and asked Battles for a hat and that Battles told him he was not supposed to be selling the hats on company property, but if Holly put the money on the steward's desk, he would get him one. Holly says he then took a twenty-dollar bill from his wallet and that Battles removed a YH hat from the bottom drawer of the steward's desk and gave it to Holly, along with ten dollars change. Holly says that Battles had a supply of YH hats in the desk drawer. Holly says he was on the clock when he purchased the hat but did not know if Battles was.
Battles denies selling YH hats at Yellow Freight. Battles says he once attempted to sell hats in the break room for Local 41 retirees but Charlie Poole, Yellow Freight's terminal operations manager, asked him not to sell anything on company premises. Poole denies this. Battles also denies storing campaign material at Yellow Freight. Based on the foregoing testimony, we credit Holly rather than Battles, whose testimony was not corroborated by Poole, and find that Battles engaged in non-incidental campaigning on behalf of the YH slate on company time, in violation of Article XI, Section 1(b)(7) of the Rules, which prohibits the same. We accordingly GRANT this protest allegation. We however DENY other allegations directed at Battles' alleged distribution of other campaign materials such as pens and bumper stickers on work time, due to lack of substantiation.
2. Speaks next alleges that Yellow Freight employee and Local 41 officer and YH slate delegate candidate Don Howerton improperly threatened his Yellow Freight co-worker Areta Soifuia for supporting the DS slate. Soifuia told our investigator that during the second week of February, Speak was campaigning at Yellow Freight and gave him a campaign button, which he pinned to his shirt, and then walked out onto the dock. Soifuia says that Howerton came up to him and said, "Man, take that thing off" and reached for it as though he would take it off Soifuia's shirt. Soifuia says that, because he is bigger than most of his coworkers, he was not physically threatened by Howerton's actions, but he did get angry. Howerton denied grabbing for Soifuia's shirt and stated that, after the protest was filed, he talked to Soifuia about the incident and apologized to him for any offense he may have committed against him. Howerton says he had no intention of intimidating or threatening Soifuia, who is bigger and younger than Howerton, and a Special Forces veteran and a practitioner of martial arts. We DENY this protest allegation, as the evidence does not rise to the level of a threat for engaging in protected support of the DS slate
3. Speak next alleges that YH slate supporters improperly removed DS slate leaflets and campaign material from the bulletin boards at Yellow Freight, and that YH slate stickers have been improperly placed on or in Yellow Freight forklifts, trucks, floor sweepers, doors and walls.
Richard Hall, a delegate candidate on the Members' Voice Slate (a third slate in the Local 41 delegate election) and Ralph Norton, a candidate for alternate delegate on the DS slate, state that they saw DS slate campaign material on a bulletin board in the Yellow Freight road dispatch area when they went to work in the area on February 22. They say that Linda Giles, a YH slate supporter and road driver for Yellow Freight, was standing by the bulletin board, and that Giles' partner was seated in a chair across the room by the vending machines. Hall says that when he looked down to place a mail sack on the floor, and then looked up again, the Speak material was gone and, in its place, was YH slate material. Norton says that Hall called this to his attention, and that he too saw that the DS slate material had been removed from the bulletin board. According to them, Giles was the only person present at the bulletin board and her partner was still seated in the chair across the room. Our investigator was unable to contact Giles. Based on the foregoing, we GRANT the protest allegation and find a violation of Article VII, Section 11(d) of the Rules.
4. Speak also provided photographs that show YH slate bumper stickers and fliers stacked on a desk in an office at Yellow Freight, readily available for distribution to passers-by. Other photographs show YH slate bumper stickers on Yellow Freight's trucks, equipment and building. Still other photographs show YH slate campaign literature stacked on the counter of the drivers' break room.
Representatives from Yellow Freight management (Poole and branch manager Jim Carlin) say that the company removes campaign stickers from company property when found, and another witness confirmed that the number of bumper stickers on Yellow Freight property decreased during the campaign. However, because the bumper stickers were kept in open view on a desktop, available to anyone so desiring, it would be difficult for Yellow Freight management not to have seen them. Additionally, photographs presented to our investigator sustain the allegation that the stickers enjoyed wide distribution throughout the company facility and on company equipment. Based on the foregoing, we find a violation of Article XI, Section 1(b)(2) of the Rules and GRANT the protest allegation. See Feeley, P874 (September 17, 1996).
5 Speak next alleges that Scott Thompson, city union steward at Roadway and alternate delegate candidate on the YH Slate, campaigned at Roadway on February 20 at 8:00 a.m. and again at 4:00 p.m. while he was booked off on union business. Loss of time payroll sheets, however, indicate that Thompson was paid for six hours on February 20 while on union business, from 9:00 a.m. until 3:30 p.m. Thus, Thompson was on his own time when he was campaigning at Roadway. Moreover, assistant terminal manager Steve Miller confirmed that Thompson attended a cartage grievance hearing on that day and that the hearing began at 9:00 a.m. We accordingly DENY this protest allegation.
6. Speak also alleges that Roadway Express employee, union steward and YH slate supporter Anthony Sandifer distributed YH campaign material on February 16 to Roadway employees, all of whom, including Sandifer, were on company time. No witness interviewed confirmed this allegation and it is accordingly DENIED.
7. Speak also alleges that Roadway Express employee and union steward Chuck Renick campaigned on company time on a number of occasions, including February 21 from 8:00 a.m. until 8:30 a.m., distributing YH slate pens to the departing and arriving shifts. One witness says that Renick carried the YH pens with him and distributes them all during the day while working. Two other witnesses state that they saw Renick sell a YH hat in the break room, where the hats were kept in the bottom drawer of the steward's file cabinet.
Speak provided photographs of YH bumper stickers attached to the union steward's bid shift and bid box and the refrigerator in the Roadway Express big center break room. Phil Young, Local 41 president and head of the YH slate, denied that the bid box and refrigerator were union property. Steve Miller, assistant terminal manager for Roadway Express, denied that the box and refrigerator were company property, stating that the Union brought them in and he therefore assumed they were union property. Scott Thompson, chief union steward for Roadway, stated he furnished the bid box because the previous one disappeared and therefore, the box was his private property. Thompson and others interviewed stated that the refrigerator was donated by a Roadway employee so long ago, no one could recall who it was. Regardless of the ownership of these items, however, the bid box in the break room is used by the chief union steward for union business. As such, it should not bear partisan campaign material. The fact that it did, along with the fact that Renick kept campaign materials in his steward's file cabinet and sold some of this material from there, requires that we GRANT this protest allegation and find a violation of Article XI, Section 1(b)(3) of the Rules.
8. Speak alleges that on February 19 members of the YH slate campaigned at the UPS James Street facility on union-paid time. This allegation was included in Speak's March 14, 2001 protest. As such, the protest allegation is untimely under Article XIII, Section 2(b) of the Rules, and is thus DENIED, there being no demonstration of good cause for the late filing. We DENY for the same reason Speak's allegation that on February 23, C.B. "Doc" Condor handed out campaign literature on union-paid time.
9. Speak next alleges in the last week of March 2001, union steward and YH slate alternate delegate candidate Scott Thompson retaliated against Michael Whetsel, a DS slate alternate delegate candidate. Whetsel works on the docks at Roadway Express from Tuesday through Thursday, midnight to 10:00 a.m. He also drives for Roadway on an overtime basis, doing so on Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays when allowed. He says that after he joined the DS slate, Thompson filed three grievances against him for being "out of hours." He explained he is not allowed to work more than 70 hours in eight days and that Thompson's grievances claimed that he had. Whetsel says that Thompson had never before filed a grievance against a union member, and that he is supposed to represent them, not file charges against them.
Thompson says the grievances were filed in accordance with the grievance procedure and on behalf of junior employees who were not asked to work. Thompson says that the grievances were not against Whetsel because they seek payment of a penalty by the company for not asking the junior employees to work. Assistant terminal manager Miller confirmed the filing of the three grievances in question but said they were filed against the company and not Whetsel. He stated Roadway may, on occasion, give a disciplinary letter to an employee as a result of an employee working too many hours because it is the employee's responsibility to keep track of his hours worked. Miller confirmed that the grievances did not seek discipline against Whetsel.
Based on the foregoing, we find no evidence of retaliation against Whetsel and accordingly DENY the protest allegation.
10. Speak next alleges that on March 5 Roadway Express assistant union steward Anthony Sandifer passed out YH campaign literature in the company break room at 8:50 a.m. The witness to this incident reported that he advised Speak of the incident about a week after it occurred. Sandifer admitted distributing campaign literature in the break room at Roadway Express, but stated it was always on his lunch or break periods. Sandifer stated he is on modified job status owing to an injury. His modified job, since he is an alternate steward, is to travel between the lunchrooms and talk to employees about any problems they may be having. He stated he also performs other light duties when requested to do so. Sandifer denied distributing campaign literature at 8:50 a.m. as charged, and there is no evidence to the contrary. Accordingly, we DENY this protest allegation.
11. Speak next alleges that on March 6 and 7, he witnessed YH slate bumper stickers on employer property at Lipton Company and Union Pacific. We DENY these protest allegations as untimely filed, given their inclusion in Speak's March 14 protest.
12. Speak next alleges that on March 10, at a regular Local 41 Union meeting, YH bumper stickers were placed on tables just inside the doors where the members walk in, and on a table just outside the Local 41 office door. The YH slate claimed that both slates had handbilled outside the union hall before the meeting, and that members who took the bumper stickers but did not want them put them on a table or threw them on the floor.
Speak provided a photograph of YH slate bumper stickers affixed to tables in the front of the meeting room. Members were required to walk by the table upon entering the room. Speak also provided a photograph of YH bumper stickers affixed to a table just outside the Local 41 office door. Members were required to walk by this table in order to enter the Local 41 office. While there is no evidence that any YH slate representative affixed these bumper stickers, the placement of the stickers in these locations is contrary to Article XI, Section 1(b)(2) of the Rules, and we accordingly GRANT this protest allegation. See Feeley, supra, and cases cited therein.
13. Speak next asserts that on March 12, he found a YH slate bumper sticker placed inside the enclosed locked bulletin board in the employees' break room at Auto Rail Services. Young defends against this allegation by arguing that Speak had a right to have his literature placed under the glass on the same bulletin board at Auto Rail Services, but never sought this. Speak claimed that the company would not allow anyone in its yard but employees, and claims that he tried to give his literature to the union steward for posting, but that the steward refused to take it. However, Speak subsequently agreed to contact the Business Agent responsible for Auto Rail Services with the request that he direct the steward to post the literature. On that basis, we deem this allegation RESOLVED.
14. Speak next alleges that from October 2000 to April 13, Young employs YH slate delegate candidate John Thompson on the staff of Local 41 to aid the YH slate campaign at UPS, and that Thompson often campaigned inside UPS facilities on union time.
Young and Dan Johnson, UPS Business Agent, state that Thompson went on on-the-job injury (OJI) status in the middle of January and was released to return to work on February 19. They further state that, while he was on OJI, he did not work for Local 41. Johnson says that Thompson went with him to a grievance hearing while he was on OJI, but he was not on the local's payroll. Johnson states that Thompson was brought in as a Business Agent when other such agents were out of town, and that Thompson was sent to UPS to monitor whether supervisors were working. Young further states that during the week of March 12, Thompson replaced Johnson at UPS while he was out of town. Young denied that Thompson has ever campaigned on the clock. He acknowledged that Thompson campaigned at UPS, but stated that he did so outside the building before 8:00 a.m. and from 8:00 or 9:00 p.m. until midnight, before or after his union work hours of 8:00 a.m. until 4:00 p.m.
Thompson's work record for the period in question is as follows:
January 17 - February 18: On compensatory time
February 19: Worked his regular job at UPS
February 20 - March 2: On the payroll of Local 41
March 5 - March 9: On vacation
March 12 - March 16: On the payroll of Local 41
March 19 - March 30: On the payroll of Local 41
April 2 - April 13: On the payroll of Local 41
UPS Attorney Gary Tocci stated that he talked with UPS management and they remembered seeing Thompson at several grievance panels but could not recall which ones or when. Tocci stated that, unless there is a deadlock in grievance resolution, no record is kept of a meeting or its attendees. UPS thus had no record of who represented the union at such meetings.
Several UPS employees were interviewed, at both Lenexa and James Street. These witnesses saw Thompson passing out campaign literature at James Street between 7:30 and 8:30 a.m., during the time drivers were arriving for work. They also saw Thompson on more than one occasion campaigning at James Street during the weeks of March 3 and/or March 10, although it is unclear if this campaign activity occurred during work-time.
Thompson was also seen campaigning in front of the building in Lenexa during the time he was on compensatory time, and thus had no work reason for being allowed to that facility. However, this activity occurred weeks before the March 14 filing of the protest allegation concerning Thompson and is untimely. The evidence concerning his other alleged work-time campaigning is inconclusive. On these two grounds, we DENY this protest allegation.
15. Speak next alleges that beginning March 12, 2001 and thereafter, the YH slate improperly used a telephone bank to call members of Teamsters Local 41 to solicit votes. Young denied that his campaign ran a telephone bank, and states that the Hoffa slate conducted this activity.
Local 41's delegate election ballots were mailed on March 13, 2001. On that date and over the next several days, Local 41 members received telephone calls at their homes. The callers said they represented the Young-Hoffa team and asked which slate they favored.
Todd Thompson, campaign coordinator for the Hoffa slate, stated that the Hoffa slate requested and received a complete IBT membership list from the Election Administrator's office, pursuant to Article VII, Section III of the Rules. The slate then contracted with a third-part vendor, which compared it with a nationwide telephone directory and provided matching telephone numbers. Local 41 names and phone numbers were then extracted and sent to SHG Consulting, along with three scripts to be used in contacting Local 41 members. A representative of SHG Consulting confirmed that his firm conducted the Local 41 telephone poll for the Hoffa campaign. He stated the telephone calls identified as "ID" on the invoice were made on March 12 and 13, and that the purpose of the "ID" calls was to identify which voters would support the YH slate. The firm's subsequent get out the vote ("GOTV") calls were made on March 16 and 17 to members identified as YH slate supporters from the ID calls, for the purpose of reminding the members to send in their ballots. He stated that supporter calls were also made on those dates to known supporters, and that the script for those calls was similar to the GOTV calls. SHG Consulting's services were also paid for by the Hoffa slate.
We DENY the protest allegation that this telephone polling and GOTV activity violates the Rules. Instead, we find the activity is legitimate political activity designed to identify slate supporters and encourage them to vote in the Local 41 delegate election. Article VII, Section 3(a) of the Rules sanctions the use of membership lists obtained by International officer candidates under that section to "support the election of delegate and/or alternate delegate candidates" who support that the International officer candidate's election. Since the YH slate supports the election of the Hoffa slate, the Hoffa slate's conduct here was proper. Nor is there any evidence that the polling was coercive interrogation under the Rules.
16. Speak next asserts that The YH slate improperly mailed campaign literature to Local 41 members highlighting the endorsement of General President Hoffa on the front and back pages, with a disclaimer as to the endorsement being made only in his individual capacity printed only on the back. He also asserts that the mailer was improperly funded by the Hoffa slate with funds raised in the International officer election, and that the mailing labels were not obtained from Local 41, giving the YH slate an unfair advantage.
The Hoffa slate admits that it paid for the mailing. The mailing labels used were from a list obtained by Young as an International officer candidate from the Election Administrator, pursuant to Article VII, Section 3(a) of the Rules. Nothing in that provision or the precedent under it bars the conduct complained of here. See Bruno, 2001 EAD 174 (February 20, 2001), aff'd, 01 EAM 44 (March 15, 2001). Similarly, there is no improper contribution of Hoffa slate funds to the YH slate, since Article XI, Section 1(b)(9)(B) permitted the Hoffa slate's expenditures here. Accordingly, we DENY these protests allegations.
17. In Case No. PR040212SO, protestors Raybourn and Baker allege that beginning March 29, 2001, they were threatened with removal from their alternate steward positions at Yellow Freight because of their support for the DS slate, and that Baker received threatening telephone calls at his home for the same reason.
Raybourn is an alternate steward at Yellow Freight and a delegate candidate on the DS slate. Baker is also an alternate steward and Raybourn's partner there. Raybourn and Baker operate a sleeper unit for Yellow Freight. They state that Ron Bailey, head steward at Yellow Freight, told them in a March 29 phone call he was under pressure from "the union hall" to terminate them from their positions as alternate stewards because of their support for Dennis Speak. Young denies this. Bailey confirmed that both Raybourn and Baker are good stewards and perform their duties satisfactorily.
Bailey admitted having a discussion with Raybourn regarding complaints made to the local union hall about their performance as stewards, and decided after the discussion not to replace them. He says that he assured them that they could vote for whomever they liked in the delegate election, but told them that they should not let delegate election politics interfere with performance of their duties as alternate stewards.
Bailey also complained about Raybourn and Baker having a meeting at the local union hall without letting him, as head steward, know. He reiterated other complaints he had about the two, including being rude to members who had questions about the contract. He says he told Raybourn and Baker that they needed to treat people as they would want to be treated. Raybourn says that Bailey has since apologized to him for this incident and the things he said to Raybourn.
Based on the above, we DENY the protest allegation. Raybourn and Baker were not deterred from their support of the DS slate nor removed from their positions. Regarding the alleged threatening telephone call, Baker stated the call was recorded on his answering machine when he was out of town, and was erased. We DENY this allegation for lack of substantiation, or any indication of a link to the delegate election.
18. Finally, Speak alleges that on April 7, 2001, after the Local 41 delegate election, he was removed from his office as secretary-treasurer of Local 41 for the rest of his term and suspended from membership for one year because he opposed the YH slate in the local's delegate election.
Dick Waers, attorney for Local 41, stated that charges against Speak were filed in September 2000 and amended on September 28, 2000. Waers stated that Speak in turn filed charges against Young on September 25, October 16 and October 18, 2000. Hearings on these charges were held on December 21, 2000, January 11 and 12, 2001. Waers points out that Speak did not file any election protests on any of the above-mentioned occasions, nor was the delegate election made an issue during the hearings on the charges.
On September 14, 2000, Young and others filed charges against Speak for allegedly violating the IBT Constitution by calling for a vote of the local membership in the event Young resigned as local union president. Neither the flier nor the charges referred to the delegate election. Counter-charges were filed by Speak on September 25, against Young for allegedly violating the Constitution. The charges did not refer to or concern the delegate election.
On September 28, the charges filed by Young were amended to include additional charges filed by Carla Joiner, a Local 41 member, regarding alleged incidents occurring in July, August and September. No mention was made of the delegate election. On October 14, charges were filed by Sherry Zeller, a Local 41 member, against Young for allegedly violating the Constitution by making sexually explicit remarks to her in the presence of approximately 250 members. No mention was made of the delegate election. On October 16, the charges filed by Speak were amended to include additional charges against Young for allegedly violating the Constitution by making intimidating statements to Speak and calling McLaughlin a liar in the presence of approximately 250 members. No mention was made of the delegate election. The hearings on these charges were held on the above-mentioned dates in December 2000 and January 2001. Meanwhile, the local union's delegate election nomination was held on February 10, 2001. Speak's slate of candidates was nominated, as was Young's.
The panel designated to hear the charges and counter-charges recommended on March 16, 2001, that Speak be removed from his office as secretary-treasurer for the remainder of his term and that he be suspended from the IBT for one year. The decision makes no mention of delegate election matters. The Local 41 ballot count was held on April 4, 2001. Speak lost his bid for delegate by 240 votes. The IBT's General Executive Board adopted the findings and recommendations of the panel on April 6, 2001.
We DENY this protest allegation. While there is no doubt that the charges between Young, Speak and their allies evidence deep political animosity, there is no evidence to suggest that Speak's candidacy in the delegate election either precipitated the charges or resulted in the decision and remedy adopted by the General Executive Board. Since that is the case, it is beyond the jurisdiction of the Election Administrator under Article I of the Rules to consider the merits of the charges or the Board's decision. Further, as indicated above, Speak did not protest the filing of the charges at the time the charges were made, nor did he allude to his candidacy for delegate in the counter-charges he filed against Young.
Remedy
When the Rules have been violated, the Election Administrator "may take whatever remedial action is appropriate." Article XIII, Section 4. In fashioning the appropriate remedy, the Election Administrator considers the nature and seriousness of the violation, as well as its potential for interference with the election process. Moreover, Article XI, Section 1(d) instructs that "[t]he remedy that may be imposed by the Election Administrator in resolving any protest concerning a candidate's or campaign's receipt or use of improper contributions will be influenced by the manner in which the contribution was solicited and/or accepted…"
Here, the evidence establishes several instances of YH slate paraphernalia, primarily bumper stickers, being improperly distributed on or permanently affixed to employer property, or property used by Local 41 agents. In addition, we have found one instance of improper removal of DS slate literature from a workplace bulletin board.
Having found Rules violations, we must assess whether these violations "may have affected the outcome of the election." Under Article XIII, Section 3(b) of the Rules, a violation of the Rules alone is not grounds for setting aside an election unless there is a reasonable probability that the election outcome may have been affected by the violation. Wirtz v. Hotel Employees, Local 6, 391 U.S. 492, 507 (1968). While a violation creates a presumption that the outcome was affected, that presumption "may of course be met by evidence which supports a finding that the violation did not affect the result." Id.; Dole v. Mailhandlers, Local 317, 711 F.Supp. 577, 581 (M.D. Ala. 1989); see also Platt, Post-1 (March 14, 1996), rev'd on other grounds, 96 EAM 144 (March 29, 1996) ("To determine whether an effect exists, the Election Officer determines mathematically whether the effect was sufficient in scope to affect the outcome of the election and/or whether there was a causal connection between the violation and the result or outcome of the election."); Ford, 95 EAM 46 (December 20, 1995) (However, "where the benefit conferred by a violation is significant, and the vote outcome is close, the Election Officer need not find a definitive causal link between the two.")
The April 4, 2001 tally of 2,854 valid ballots that the YH slate won all delegate and alternate delegate seats. The margin between the lowest polling successful delegate candidate and the next candidate was 240 votes. The similar margin in the alternate delegate contest was 323.
The violations found here are insufficient to warrant a rerun election. They are isolated incidents in a large local union and, unlike those prior cases in which we have ordered a rerun election, involved neither improper use of union resources coupled with an attempt to cover-up the improper use, Richards, 2001 EAD 328 (April 26, 2001), nor an eve of ballot mailing distribution of materials in violation of the Rules, Noll, 2001 EAD 294 (March 31, 2001), aff'd, 01 EAM 56 (April 6, 2001), DePietro, 2001 EAD 324 (April 20, 2001), aff'd, 01 EAM 62 (April 27, 2001). In contrast to such cases, we find that the minor violations here did not affect the results of the election at Local 41.
To remedy the violations found, and in order to prevent their recurrence in the International officer campaign (in which Local 41's Phil Young is a candidate), we order the YH slate, Young and his supporters to:
a) cease and desist and desist from any further violations of the Rules;
b) by May 7, 2001, post the attached notice on all bulletin boards at Local 41 worksites that are available for union postings, and ensure that the posting remains in effect for thirty (30) days; and
c) immediately remove all bumper stickers and other campaign paraphernalia that is now or later becomes affixed to employer or union property or equipment from the same.
An order of the Election Administrator, unless otherwise stayed, takes immediate effect against a party found to be in violation of the Rules. Lopez, 96 EAM 73 (February 13, 1996).
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 15th Street NW, Tenth Floor, Washington, DC 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 331
DISTRIBUTION LIST VIA UPS NEXT DAY AIR:
Patrick Szymanski
IBT General Counsel
25 Louisiana Ave. NW
Washington DC 20001
Bradley T. Raymond
Finkel, Whitefield, Selik, Raymond,
Ferrara & Feldman
32300 Northwestern Highway
Suite 200
Farmington Hills, MI 48334
Betty Grdina
Yablonski, Both & Edelman
Suite 800
1140 Connecticut Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20036
J. Douglas Korney
Korney & Heldt
Suite 1551
30700 Telegraph Road
Bingham Farms, MI 48025
Tom Leedham c/o Stefan Ostrach
110 Mayfair Lane
Eugene, OR 97404
Barbara Harvey
Suite 1800
Penobscot Building
645 Griswold
Detroit, MI 48226
IBT Local 41
4501 Van Brunt Blvd.
Kansas City, MO 64130
IBT Local 41
Attn: Phil Young
4501 Van Brunt Blvd.
Kansas City, MO 64130
Lindsay Marshall
UPS, Inc. Legal Department
55 Glenlake Parkway NE
Atlanta, GA 30328
Gary Tocci
Kim Kaplan
Schnader, Harrison, etc.
Suite 3600
1600 Market Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103
United Parcel Service
223 North James
Kansas City, KS 66118
Roadway Express
233 South 42nd Street
Kansas City, KS 66106
Lipton Company
27080 W. 159th Street
New Century, KS 66031
Union Pacific/Rail Terminal Services
4801 Gardner
Kansas City, MO 64120
Auto Rail Services
12801 NE 41st
Kansas City, MO 64161
C.B. "Doc" Conder
11429 Macky
Overland Park, KS 66210
Keith Claven
Rt 2 Box 106
Bosworth, MO 64623
Don Howerton
9519 South Howard Road
Lees Summit, MO 64086
Arlie Williams
11225 92nd Highway
Kearney, MO 64060
Tom (Duke) Nabors
7726 NW Schott Drive
Kansas City, MO 64502
Bud Ford
28364 Highway Z
Milan, MO 63556
Nancy Yoke
1229 NE Birchwood Drive
Lees Summit, MO 64086
John Thompson
202 West Laredo Trail
Raymore, MO 64083
Charlotte Blegenberg
6902 NW 79th
Kansas City, MO 64152
Rodger Garton
3340 SE Freeway Farms Drive
Holt, MO 64048
Rick Houser
8704 Booth Avenue
Kansas City, MO 64138
Ray Nickerson
13805 East 198th Street
Peculiar, MO 64078
Vince Reyes
5312 NW Downing
Blue Spring, MO 64015
Steve Steen
Rt 1 Box 810
Concordia, MO 64020
Ray Corbett
13004 NW 78 Terrace
Parkville, MO 64152
Scott Thompson
12700 Edinburgh
Olathe, KS 66062
Dan Johnson
20020 Missouri City Road
Liberty, OH 64068
Michael Whetsel
15516 East 42nd Place South
Independence, MO 64055
Anthony Standifer
2515 Stark
Kansas City, MO 64129
Jim Hoffa Unity Slate 2001
2009 Pennsylvania Avenue SE
Washington, DC 20003
IBT Local 41
Attn: Ron Bailey
4501 Van Brunt Blvd.
Kansas City, MO 64130
Dennis Speak
6907 North Brookside
Liberty, MO 64740
Wayne Raybourn
David Baker
506 SE 850 Road
Deepwater, MO 64740
Dolores C. Hall
1000 Belmont Place
Metairie, LA 70001
NOTICE TO ALL MEMBERS OF LOCAL 41
The Rules for the 2000-2001 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election ("Rules") prohibit a candidate or slate from posting campaign paraphernalia such as bumper stickers on employer or union property, other than on bulletin boards literature postings accomplished in a manner allowed by the Rules. Similarly, the Rules prohibit IBT members from removing properly posted campaign literature from union bulletin boards. The Rules also prohibit the distribution of campaign literature and paraphernalia during work time.
The Election Administrator has concluded that supporters of the Phil Young/Jim Hoffa Members First Local 41 delegate election slate (the "YH slate") have engaged in such conduct.
The Election Administrator will not permit any such violations of the Rules.
The Election Administrator has ordered the YH slate to cease and desist and desist from any further violations of the Rules, to immediately remove all bumper stickers and other campaign paraphernalia that is affixed now or later becomes affixed to employer or union property or equipment from the same, and to post this notice.
Any protest you have regarding your rights under the Rules or any conduct by any person or entity which violates the Rules should be filed with William A. Wertheimer, Jr., Office of the Election Administrator, 727 Fifteenth Street, NW, Washington DC 20005, telephone 800-565-VOTE, fax (202) 454-1501.
William A. Wertheimer, Jr.
William A. Wertheimer, Jr.
Election Administrator
This is an official notice and must remain posted for thirty (30) consecutive days from the day of initial posting, and must not be altered, defaced or covered by any other material.