IN RE: ROGER BIELINSKI, Protestor.
Protest Decision 2006 ESD 244
Issued: May 16, 2006
OES Case Nos. P-06-102-020106-MW
Roger Bielinski a member of Local Union 344, 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 local union violated the Rules and the local union bylaws by scheduling the nominations meeting for the delegate and alternate delegate election without first adopting a motion permitting that a special meeting for that purpose be called.
Election Supervisor representative Taea Calcut investigated this protest.
Findings of Fact
Bielinski filed his protest on January 30, 2006, stating the following:
[T]his letter is in regard to the Nomination Meeting at L. 344. I feel the lack of mention of a Special Meeting in the notice makes one think that it is business as usual for delegate election. And for us at L. 344 that means holding nominations a[t] Jan. meeting which is what I thought was the case. Sure the time and date are clearly stated, but past practice has been to hold the nominations at the regular union meeting. There is no mention of a Special Meeting, or Nomination (Special) meeting. This letter is deceitful. The date for union meeting was Jan. 15 - in the notice it is the [sic] Jan. 10. I really didn't catch this until it was to[o] late. I want my name on the list of candidates for delegates to the convention.
Investigation showed that, in accordance with the Rules, Local Union 344 submitted its local union election plan to our office on September 30, 2005. At the same time, a notice of plan submission was posted on all bulletin boards where local union members are employed, announcing that the plan had been submitted to our office for review and approval and that the submitted plan was available for review and comment by local union members. The local union election plan specifically stated that a meeting would be held on January 10, 2006 for the sole purpose of nominating members of Local Union 344 to run for delegate and alternate delegate to the 27th IBT convention.
On November 2, 2006, we approved the local union election plan submitted by Local Union 344. We prepared a plan summary, which listed the date of the nominations meeting as January 10, 2006. In accordance with the Rules, this plan summary was posted on all union bulletin boards where Local Union 344 members are employed for the full period of the election process.
On or about December 19, 2006, also in accordance with the Rules, a written notice of the nominations meeting was sent to each member of Local Union 344 by first class mail. That notice stated that:
Nomination of candidates for 6 delegate(s) and 4 alternate delegate(s) to the June 2006 International Brotherhood of Teamsters Convention in Las Vegas NV, will be held on:
Date: January 10, 2006
Time: 8:00 p.m.
Location: 10020 W. Greenfield Ave., Milwaukee WI 53214
An identical notice was posted on all bulletin boards at locations where members of Local Union 344 were employed. The notice followed exactly the form of notice of nomination promulgated by the Election Supervisor as Form 7.
Beilinski received this notice but did not attend the nominations meeting, contending the notice was invalid because a "special meeting" under local union bylaws may be called only by motion of the president.
This protest was filed nearly 20 days after the date the nominations meeting was held and 15 days after the date of the January general membership meeting.
Analysis
Article II, Section 5(d) of the Rules provides that "[n]otice of nomination meeting(s) shall be given on a form promulgated by the Election Supervisor by mailing a copy of the notice to each member at his/her last known home address by first class mail at least twenty-one (21) days prior to the first nomination meeting." Nothing in the Rules requires that the notice include the phrase "special meeting," as the protestor contends. Nor do the Rules require that nominations meetings comply with local union bylaws. The nominations meeting and the notice of it provided to the membership of Local Union 344 therefore complied with the Rules.
Although the Rules do not require that the notice also comply with local union bylaws, we find that it did. Local union bylaw 19(B) permits a special meeting of the local union to be called by membership, via petition, or by the president "on his own motion." In either event, "[r]easonable notice of the date, time and place of any special meeting, and of the questions to be presented, shall be given to the membership." The submission of the local union election plan constituted the president's motion for a special meeting for the purpose of nominating candidates for delegate and alternate delegate, and the mailing and posting of notices to this effect met the bylaws' requirement of reasonable notice.
Accordingly, we DENY this protest. In reaching this conclusion, we also note that the January 30 protest was filed well after the 2-day time limit permitted by Article XIII, Section 2(b) of the Rules, whether measured from January 10 nominations meeting or the January 15 general membership meeting at which Bielinski states nominations should have been conducted.
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 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 244
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
Roger Bielinski
P.O. Box 210276
Milwaukee, WI 53221
Paul Lovinus, Secretary-Treasurer
IBT Local Union 344
10020 West Greenfield Avenue
Milwaukee, WI 53214
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
Taea Calcut
1725 K Street, NW Suite 1400
Washington, DC 20005
tcalcut@ibtvote.org
Jeffrey Ellison
510 Highland Avenue, #325
Milford, MI 48381
EllisonEsq@aol.com