IN RE: THOMAS BENNETT, Protestor.
Protest Decision 2006 ESD 80
Issued: February 14, 2006
OES Case No. P-06-100-013106-MW
Thomas Bennett, a member of Local Union 200, filed a pre-election protest pursuant to Article XIII, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the 2005-2006 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election ("Rules"). He alleged that local union business agent Chris Hooser violated the Rules when he asked shop steward Werner Holzwarth to remove a campaign button at the start of a labor-management meeting at Roundy's.
Election Supervisor representative Joe Childers investigated this protest.
Findings of Fact
Representatives of labor and management met at Roundy's, a food distributor under Local Union 200's jurisdiction, on January 26, 2006 to address workplace standards. Present for the union were Hooser, Holzwarth, and Tiffany Owens, an IBT engineer. Management was represented by Colby Krouse, Robbie Johnson, Jamie MacGrey, and Larry Stumps. Also present were representatives of Roundy's consultant, Personnel Resource Management.
When Hooser arrived, he saw that Holzwarth was wearing a campaign button supporting Teamsters4Teamsters, a slate in the delegate and alternate delegate election. Hooser immediately asked Holzwarth to take the button off, stating that wearing it in that meeting violated the Rules. Holzwarth complied.
This protest followed. In support of the protest, Holzwarth and protestor Bennett stated that members employed at Roundy's routinely wear buttons supporting the two slates competing in the delegate and alternate delegate election and that no one has asked them to remove them. Based on this history, they assert a pre-existing right to wear campaign buttons in the workplace. However, Holzwarth and Bennett provided no history that campaign buttons have been worn in labor-management meetings.
Hooser confirmed that he asked Holzwarth to remove the campaign button and explained that he did so because it does not "look good for management to see the union 'divided.'" He told our investigator that he made the same request at a grievance meeting held February 2. As support for his position that wearing campaign buttons during meetings with management violates the Rules, Hooser relied on an advisory issued by then IBT general counsel Patrick Szymanski that states in part the following:
Officers and employees may wear campaign buttons, hats, shirts and other campaign paraphernalia during working and non-working hours, provided that they may not wear these items when conducting business with employers or other persons or entities who are not union members.
Analysis
The propriety of wearing campaign buttons in meetings with management was decided in Stockton, 2001 EAD 292 (March 31, 2001), viz.
To guard against the appearance of local union support for any particular delegate candidate or slate that might be created when a representative of the union wears campaign insignia while dealing with any third party as representatives of the union, such displays by representatives of the union serving as such are prohibited. See Advisory on Wearing of Campaign Buttons and Other Emblems (October 10, 2000), and Addendum to Advisory on Wearing of Campaign Buttons and Other Emblems (March 8, 2001). This restriction applies not only to union officers, business agents and full-time employees, but also to any member who represents the union in dealings with third parties. Id.
The first cited advisory provided the following rationale for this rule. Thus,
[A]n unrelated third party might assume that the union entity was supporting or opposing a particular candidate or group of candidates if a union officer, business agent or employee were permitted to wear campaign emblems during the time he/she was representing the union in relations with unrelated third parties. Accordingly, while union officers, business agents, and employees may wear campaign emblems during working hours and while engaged in their regular union business, they may not wear such emblems when representing the union before or with an unrelated third party. Thus, union officers, business agents and employees may not wear campaign emblems when meeting with an employer of IBT members for collective bargaining or grievance resolution, when participating either as an advocate, witness or panel member in grievance hearings, when appearing on behalf of the union before legislative, administrative or judicial tribunals, when making public appearances on behalf of the union, or when engaged in similar type activities where the wearing of a campaign emblem might inappropriately suggest that the union with which the officer, business agent or employee is affiliated, is, as an entity supporting or opposing any particular candidate or group of candidates.
The addendum to this advisory extended the prohibition to "any member who represents the union in dealings with third parties. Therefore any member, including a part-time union employee or a steward, who represents the union should not wear campaign emblems while engaging in any activity described above."
The precedent provided by Stockton has made it unnecessary to reissue the cited advisories in this election cycle. We find that, had Holzwarth not removed his campaign button before the labor-management meeting on January 26, he would have violated the Rules. We further find that Hooser averted that Rules violation by requesting Holzwarth to remove the button, and that his request at the February 2 grievance meeting prevented a separate, similar violation.
Accordingly, we DENY the 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 Supervisor 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 the parties, as well as upon the Election Supervisor for the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, 1725 K Street, N.W., Suite 1400, Washington, D.C. 20007-5135, all within the time prescribed above. A copy of the protest must accompany the request for hearing.
Richard W. Mark
Election Supervisor
cc: Kenneth Conboy
2006 ESD 80
DISTRIBUTION LIST (BY EMAIL UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED):
Bradley T. Raymond, General Counsel
International Brotherhood of Teamsters
25 Louisiana Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001-2198
braymond@teamster.org
Sarah Riger, Staff Attorney
International Brotherhood of Teamsters
25 Louisiana Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001-2198
sriger@teamster.org
David J. Hoffa, Esq.
Hoffa 2006
30300 Northwestern Highway, Suite 324
Farmington Hills, MI 48834
David@hoffapllc.com
Barbara Harvey
645 Griswold Street
Suite 3060
Detroit, MI 48226
blmharvey@sbcglobal.net
Ken Paff
Teamsters for a Democratic Union
P.O. Box 10128
Detroit, MI 48210
ken@tdu.org
Judith Brown Chomsky
P.O. Box 29726
Elkins Park, PA 19027
jchomsky@igc.org
Stephen Ostrach
1863 Pioneer Parkway East, #217
Springfield, OR 97477-3907
saostrach@gmail.com
Thomas Bennett
337 Rubicon
Neosho, WI 53059
teamstertom@charter.net
Chris Hooser
9820 Veronica Drive
Oak Creek, WI 53154
Werner O. Holzwarth, Jr.
4567 S. Whitnall Avenue, #307
Saint Francis, WI 53235
Tim Buban, Secretary-Treasurer
Local Union 200
6200 Bluemound Road
Milwaukee, WI 53213
Joe F. Childers
201 West Short Street, Suite 310
Lexington, KY 40507
childerslaw@yahoo.com
William Broberg
1108 Fincastle Road
Lexington, KY 40502
wcbroberg@aol.com
Jeffrey Ellison
510 Highland Avenue, #325
Milford, MI 48381
EllisonEsq@aol.com