ELECTION APPEALS MASTER
|
IN RE: LUCIO REYES,
Protestor.
|
11 Elec. App. 50 (KC)
ORDER
|
This matter is an appeal from the Election Supervisor's decision 2011 ESD 281 issued June 18, 2011. The appeal was submitted by Geoffrey Piller, Esq.
A hearing was held before me on June 24, 2011. The following persons were heard by way of teleconference: Jeffrey J. Ellison, Esq., for the Election Supervisor, Rochelle Goeffe Investigative Officer, Geoffrey Piller, Esq. on behalf Local Union 601 and Maria Ashley Alvarado and Maria Ashley Alvarado, President of The No Mas Lucio slate.
The principal appeal issue is straight forward. Appellant admits that as a candidate for delegate in Local 601, in undisputed violation of the Election Rules, she repeatedly used union resources to assist her slate's campaign over an extended period of time, while broadly denouncing her opponent through the Election Rules protest tribunal, for doing the same thing. Indeed, in an astonishing display of hypocrisy she wrote to the IBT General President calling for imposition of a Trusteeship "to save the reputation and effectiveness of our Local and . . . to preserve the integrity of the upcoming general election campaign for the International." This sanctimonious grandstanding was followed by a landslide in her favor.
In investigating appellant's conduct, the Election Supervisor found that she compounded her wrongdoing under the Rules by giving "evasive and misleading evidence" to his investigation. Appeals Statement of Jeffrey Ellison, dated June 24, 2011, at 3.
Under our precedent in Richards, 01 EAM 63 (May 14, 2001), the Election Supervisor properly concluded that appellant gave misleading evidence in, and therefore obstructed, his investigation. Among other remedies, he disqualified her from taking her seat as a delegate to the IBT Convention.
The record and cases clearly support this determination. On the claim of untimely filing of the underlying protest, I conclude that the protest was timely filed and that, in any case, I would have exercised my clear discretion under the Rules to waive the prudential requirement.
Accordingly, the decision of the Election Supervisor is in all respects affirmed
SO ORDERED:
__s/Kenneth Conboy_____________
Kenneth Conboy
Election Appeals Master
Dated: June 24, 2011