IN RE: TOM LEEDHAM RANK AND FILE POWER SLATE,
Protest Decision 2001 EAD 417
Issued: August 1, 2001
OEA Case Nos. PR062811NA
The Tom Leedham Rank and File Power slate (the "Leedham slate") 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"). It alleges the IBT favored the Hoffa Unity slate ("Hoffa slate") in its videography of convention proceedings.
In Martinez, 2001 EAD 414 (July 27, 2001), appeal pending, we found the IBT had endorsed the Hoffa slate in violation of the Rules by using words and phrases in its convention presentations that have been adopted as campaign slogans by the Hoffa slate.
Election Administrator representatives Michael Nicholson, Jeffrey Ellison, and Jason Weidenfeld investigated the protest.
Findings of Fact and Analysis
The IBT held its convention June 25 through 29, 2001 in a large auditorium at the Paris Las Vegas Resort and Casino in Las Vegas, Nevada. In addition to three speakers' lecterns on the stage, the convention floor was equipped with six microphones that were used for the nominations procedure and floor debate on resolutions proposed to the body for action. The hall was also outfitted with a number of television cameras that produced images projected on large screens erected behind the podium and affixed to the walls on both sides of the hall. Generally, these screens showed the person who was speaking at the moment. Occasionally displayed was a broad shot of the convention floor.
Nominations were made from the convention floor. Nominators spoke from microphone 1 on the left side of the hall and seconders used microphone 3 on the opposite side. The candidate accepted the nomination from microphone 2 in the center of the convention floor.
Most often, the image of the nominator or seconder was projected on the auditorium's screens during that person's speech. However, the protest claims that Hoffa slate candidates were occasionally shown during the presentation of a nomination or second and that Leedham slate candidates were not. The protest asserts this use of so-called "reaction shots" was deliberate and served to enhance the stature of Hoffa slate candidates.
Review of the videotape of convention proceedings shows that, of the more than 50 individuals nominated, the image of the candidate was shown during a nominating or seconding speech 7 times, and each time the candidate depicted was a member of the Hoffa slate. Thus, Randy Cammack, Tyson Johnson, Patrick Flynn, Dotty Malinsky, Lester Singer, Phil Young, and James Hoffa all were shown reacting to the nominating or seconding speech. All such reaction shots were brief and occurred only when the speech was interrupted by sustained applause. No reaction shots of Leedham slate candidates were shown during nominating or seconding speeches, and no such speeches were stopped by such applause. Regardless of slate affiliation, each candidate who was present was shown accepting the nomination.
The videography producer, a contractor employed by the IBT, stated that decisions about reaction shots were made by the contractor's staff for reasons of journalistic and visual interest and not for a partisan purpose. He denied that he took any direction from the IBT or its agents in this regard.
The convention ran five days and consumed more than 25 hours of videotape. Proposed resolutions and constitutional amendments brought vigorous debate from supporters of the Hoffa slate and supporters of the Leedham slate. Images of speakers on the convention floor were projected on the screens, and the number of times Leedham slate supporters spoke and the duration of their speeches far exceeded the proportion of delegates the Leedham slate controlled. Taken as a whole, we conclude the brief videographic reaction shots of a few Hoffa slate candidates did not, in themselves, amount to discriminatory promotion of the Hoffa slate by the IBT, especially given that the remainder of the videography depicted Leedham slate supporters routinely.
The protest also contends that the broad shots of the convention floor avoided pockets where Leedham slate supporters were seated. Review of the videotape shows that Hoffa slate supporters were depicted in such shots most of the time. However, we note that the Hoffa slate controlled more than 90% of the delegates. For the reason just stated, we find that the videographic recording of the convention proceedings did not amount to discriminatory promotion of the Hoffa slate.
Finally, the protest alleges that speakers brought to the stage lecterns were permitted to wear Hoffa slate clothing and buttons when speaking. Precedent establishes that members may wear such regalia when on official business for the union, except when representing the union before an unrelated third party. The exception does not apply to the convention, therefore the speakers permissibly wore their partisan clothes and buttons.
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 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 417
DISTRIBUTION LIST VIA 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
J. Douglas Korney
Korney & Heldt
30700 Telegraph Road
Suite 1551
Bingham Farms, MI 48025
Barbara Harvey
Penobscot Building
Suite 1800
645 Griswold
Detroit, MI 48226
Betty Grdina
Yablonski, Both & Edelman
Suite 800
1140 Connecticut Ave. NW
Washington, D.C. 20036
Tom Leedham c/o Stefan Ostrach
110 Mayfair
Eugene, OR 97404
Todd Thompson
209 Pennsylvania Ave. SE
Washington, DC 20003
Michael Nicholson
122 S. Main Street
Suite 210
Ann Arbor, MI 48103
Jeffrey Ellison
65 Cadillac Square
Suite 3727
Detroit, MI 48226
Jason Weidenfeld
727 Fifteenth Street, NW
10th floor
Washington, D.C. 20005