Protest Decisions

February 14, 1996

VIA UPS OVERNIGHT

James E. Eastwood

February 14, 1996

Page 1

James Eastwood

2416 North Bigelow Street

Peoria, IL  61604

Charles Coleman

P.O. Box 658

Richton, IL 60471

Frank J. Wsol, Secretary/Treasurer

Teamsters Local Union 710

4217 Halsted Street

Chicago, IL   60609

James E. Eastwood

February 14, 1996

Page 1

Re: Election Office Case No. E-062-LU710-EOH

Gentlemen:

              In response to a pre-nomination request for eligibility verification from

Charles Coleman, a member of Local Union 710, the Election Officer found him eligible to run for delegate from the local union to the International convention.  Mr. Coleman was nominated for delegate at the Local Union 710 nomination meeting on January 28, 1996.  James E. Eastwood, also a member of  Local Union 710, filed a protest concerning the eligibility of Mr. Coleman.

In order to be eligible to run for delegate to the International convention, a member must be in continuous good standing with his local union, with his dues paid to the local union for a period of 24 consecutive months prior to the month of nomination with no interruption in active membership due to suspensions, expulsions, withdrawals, transfers or failure to pay fines or assessments.  Rules for the 1995-1996 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”), Article VII, Section 1(a)(1).

James E. Eastwood

February 14, 1996

Page 1

Article VII, Section 2(b) of the Rules provides that “[t]he active employment at the craft requirement may be excused by . . .  active pursuit of an unresolved grievance or other legal action challenging the suspension or discharge.”

Mr. Coleman was terminated by his employer, Advance Transportation, in April 1995.  By award dated October 30, 1995, an arbitrator sustained the union’s grievance over the termination and ordered that Mr. Coleman be reinstated with back pay from the date of his termination to the date of his reinstatement.  His employer did not reinstate him.  On December 29, 1995, Mr. Coleman petitioned the Circuit Court of Cook County for an order compelling his reinstatement.  Accordingly, the Election Officer finds that since his termination, Mr. Coleman has actively pursued a grievance and further legal action challenging his termination.

Mr. Coleman was on dues checkoff until his termination in April 1995.  In April 1995, the local union assessed a $1 per month retroactive dues increase on Mr. Coleman dating back to April 1994.  According to the local union, Mr. Coleman’s dues should have been raised the year before because of a pay raise he received at that time.  There is no evidence that

Mr. Coleman received any notice of this dues increase from the local union prior to the tender of his dues in April 1995.

On April 24, 1995, Mr. Coleman paid dues for May, June and July 1995 at the rate at which his dues were previously checked off.  When Mr. Coleman made this payment, he was given a handwritten receipt by an agent of the local union.  On the receipt was written a confirmation that Mr. Coleman had paid his May, June, and July 1995 dues on April 28, 1995.  This written receipt contained no mention of the dues increase and did not put

Mr. Coleman on notice that his dues were insufficient as a result.[1]

Nevertheless, $13 of Mr. Coleman’s April payment was used to cover the retroactive dues increase, causing the non-TITAN record to show that Mr. Coleman’s April payment was insufficient to cover his July dues.  Mr. Coleman’s next payment was in August.  As a result, his non-TITAN record now indicates that he paid the balance of his July 1995 dues late.

James E. Eastwood

February 14, 1996

Page 1

Mr. Coleman reasonably calculated his dues payment in April 1995 based on the amount checked off from his wages when he was employed.  Since he had not been informed of the dues increase approved by the local union, he had no reasonable way of knowing that he owed more than he had paid in months past.  The local union failed to raise Mr. Coleman’s dues when he received his pay raise in April 1994.  Then, unbeknownst to Mr. Coleman, the union sought to extract the missing funds from his cash payment after he had been terminated.  In addition, the local union failed to inform Mr. Coleman that this retroactive extraction would occur.  Rather, the local union provided him with a written assurance that he was paid through July 1995.

The Election Officer has consistently held that where a member’s dues are posted late or incomplete because of an employer or local union error, the member is not penalized.  If a member pays his monthly dues before the last business day of that month, but the local union’s TITAN operator does not record the payment on the system until the first day of the next month, the member maintains good standing.  See Rabine, E-027-LU763-EOH (January 25, 1996).  Likewise, if an employer fails to check off dues in a month in which the member has sufficient earnings from which dues could be deducted, the member’s eligibility does not suffer.  See Goscinak, E-009-LU259-EOH (October 31, 1995).  In addition, an individual on checkoff who pays dues at a rate lower than that prescribed by the IBT Constitution or local union bylaws does not lose good standing if he paid the dues rate established by his local union and communicated to him.  See Snow, E-053-LU25-EOH (February 13, 1996).

In the present case, Mr. Coleman’s local union failed to raise his dues at the time his earnings increased and then sought to rectify the error by deducting the difference from a valid, timely cash-dues payment without informing the cash payer.  Mr. Coleman had sufficient earnings from which the appropriate dues could have been withheld during each month of that year.  After he lost his job, Mr. Coleman attempted to maintain his good standing by paying his dues in advance in cash.  The local union not only penalized him for its own failure to act in April 1994, but even assured him that his payment was sufficient to fully cover three months’ dues.

In light of these facts, any late payment which appears on Mr. Coleman’s record is the result of local union error.  Mr. Coleman made every reasonable effort to maintain his good standing.  Accordingly, it is the determination of the Election Officer that Mr. Coleman is eligible to run for delegate or alternate delegate to the International convention.

Any interested party not satisfied with this determination may request a hearing before the Election Appeals Master within one day of receipt of this letter.  The parties are reminded that, absent extraordinary circumstances, no party may rely upon evidence that was not presented to the Office of the Election Officer in any such appeal.  Requests for a hearing shall be made in writing and shall be served on:

Kenneth Conboy, Esq.

Latham and Watkins

885 Third Avenue, Suite 1000

New York, NY 10022

Fax (212) 751-4864

James E. Eastwood

February 14, 1996

Page 1

Copies of the request for hearing must be served on the parties listed above as well as upon the Election Officer, 400 North Capitol Street, Suite 855, Washington, D.C. 20001, Facsimile (202) 624-3525.  A copy of the protest must accompany the request for a hearing.

Sincerely,

Barbara Zack Quindel

Election Officer

cc:               Kenneth Conboy, Election Appeals Master

Julie Hamos, Regional Coordinator