IN RE: DAVID BARKER, Protestor.
Protest Decision 2006 ESD 236
Issued: May 12, 2006
OES Case No. P-06-261-040806-MW
David Barker 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"). The protest alleged that the independent election officer for Local Union 325 failed or refused to provide the protestor with certain information related to the delegate and alternate delegate election, in violation of the Rules.
Election Supervisor representative William C. Broberg investigated the protest.
Findings of Fact
On March 14, 2006, protestor Barker made written request to Matthew Fitch, the independent election officer for Local Union 325's delegate and alternate delegate election, for the following information:
The number of nominations meeting notices sent to local union members in January 2006;
The number of nominations meeting notices returned as undeliverable and the names of those members;
The number of ballots printed;
The certification of the printer concerning the number of ballots printed; and
The number of ballots mailed.
The letter requested that Fitch produce the information to Barker within 5 days. Fitch did not do so.
Barker faxed this protest to our offices early on the morning of Saturday, April 8. Later that day, the tally of ballots for Local Union 325's delegate and alternate delegate election was conducted. Prior to beginning the count, Fitch gave Barker the number of ballots printed, the number mailed, and the printer's certification. He did not provide the number of nominations meeting notices mailed, the number of those notices returned as undeliverable and the names of the members whose notices had been returned. Fitch produced the information before he received the protest, which we transmitted to interested parties on Monday, April 10.
Analysis
The protest alleges that Barker, a candidate, was denied information to which he was entitled under the Rules. Barker's entitlement, if he has any, arises from Article IX, which grants broad observer rights to candidates and their designees.
As such, just as Barker was entitled to attend the printing and mailing of ballots and observe first-hand the number printed and mailed, he was entitled to have that information provided him by the election officer conducting the delegate and alternate delegate election. That officer, Fitch, provided the information concerning ballots printed and mailed, although he did not do so promptly. Nonetheless, Fitch produced the information before he received the protest in this matter; similarly, Barker received the information in sufficient time to put it to use at the tally of ballots. For these reasons, we deem this aspect of the protest RESOLVED. However, we caution those responsible for conducting local union delegate and alternate delegate elections to attend to requests such as these with dispatch; confidence in the process is enhanced when information such as the number of ballots printed and mailed is made readily available to those requesting it. See Jackson, 2006 ESD 131 (March 6, 2006), aff'd, 06 EAM 26 (March 24, 2006).
In contrast to information concerning the number of ballots printed and mailed, the Rules' observer rights do not include the right to observe the mailing of nominations meeting notices or the processing of undeliverable notices. As Barker had no right under the Rules to observe this activity, he similarly had no right to demand that the local union produce such information to him. Accordingly, we DENY this aspect of 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
885 Third Avenue, Suite 1000
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 Office of the Election Supervisor for the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, 1725 K Street, Suite 1400, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20006, 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 236
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
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
Daniel E. Clifton
Lewis, Clifton & Nikolaidis, P.C.
275 Seventh Avenue, Suite 2300
New York, NY 10001
dclifton@lcnlaw.com
Stephen Ostrach
1863 Pioneer Parkway East, #217
Springfield, OR 97477-3907
saostrach@gmail.com
David Barker
W7939 Sweet Road
Darien, WI 53114
Matthew Fitch
Merriman River Associates
P.O. Box 185332
Hamden, CT 06518
matt@merrimanriver.com
Richard Thompson, Secretary-Treasurer
IBT Local Union 325
5533 Eleventh Street
Rockford, IL 61109
William Broberg
1108 Fincastle Road
Lexington, KY 40502
wcbroberg@aol.com
Joe F. Childers
201 West Short Street, Suite 310
Lexington, KY 40507
childerslaw@yahoo.com
Jeffrey Ellison
510 Highland Avenue, #325
Milford, MI 48381
EllisonEsq@aol.com