IN RE: LEEDHAM SLATE, Protestor.
Protest Decision 2006 ESD 354
Issued: September 24, 2006
OES Case No. P-06-302-062806-HQ
(See also Election Appeals Master decision 06 EAM 69)
The Tom Leedham Strong Contracts Good Pensions slate 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 IBT violated the Rules by sponsoring or permitting campaign activity during the official proceedings of the 27th International convention, held June 26 through 30, 2006 in Las Vegas, Nevada.
Election Supervisor representative Jeffrey Ellison investigated this protest.
Findings of Fact
The protest alleged that impermissible campaign activity had been sanctioned or permitted by the IBT in two separate ways. First, the protest alleged that James P. Hoffa, incumbent General President and candidate for reelection to that position, used his position as chair of the convention to permit supporters to make campaign statements from the floor while the convention was in session. Second, the protest alleged that a video presentation that immediately preceded the keynote address of General Secretary-Treasurer C. Thomas Keegel constituted impermissible campaigning for Keegel.
The IBT prepared a transcript of convention proceedings. This complete transcript and the videotape recording of the convention were reviewed in analyzing the protest allegations.
1. Alleged campaigning from the floor of the convention.
On the morning of the first day of the convention, the delegate assembly adopted the parliamentary Convention Rules that would govern the convention. Rule 1 granted to the General President the authority to "be the Permanent Chairman of the Convention." The rule further provided that "[t]he Permanent Chairman may appoint a Parliamentarian to whom all disputed questions of procedure shall be referred. The Parliamentarian's decision, if adopted by the Chairman, shall become the ruling of the Chairman.
Rule 16 of the Convention Rules governed the right of delegates to speak from the floor. It read in part as follows:
Rule 16. Each delegate who rises to speak shall respectfully address the Chair, shall announce his or her name and the number of the delegate's subordinate body affiliation, shall speak not more than two (2) minutes and shall confine his or her remarks to the question under debate.
Rule 34 set forth the chair's authority to enforce Rule 16, among others, viz.
Rule 34. If any delegate is called to order by the Chair, and refuses to obey such order, the delegate shall be excluded from that session, and may be excluded from all remaining sessions of the Convention, except that no delegate may be excluded from the nominating sessions on the second, third and fourth days of the Convention.
The convention parliamentarian was Stanley Brand, former general counsel of the United States House of Representatives.
During the afternoon session of the first day of the convention, Tyson Johnson requested recognition for a "point of privilege," and convention chair Hoffa did so. Johnson was an elected delegate to the convention, is currently a Southern region vice president and is a candidate for reelection to that position on the Hoffa 2006 slate.
"Point of privilege" (or "point of personal privilege," as other delegates would subsequently call it) was not addressed by the convention rules the delegate assembly had adopted during the morning session of the first day. However, Roberts' Rules of Order address questions of privilege as follows:
19. Questions of Privilege. Questions relating to the rights and privileges of the assembly, or to any of its members, take precedence of all other motions except the three preceding relating to adjournment and recess, to which they yield. If the question is one requiring immediate action it may interrupt a member's speech; as, for example, when, from any cause, a report that is being read cannot be heard in a part of the hall. … When a member rises for this purpose he should not wait to be recognized, but immediately on rising should say, "Mr. Chairman," -- and when he catches the chairman's eye, should add, "I rise to a question of privilege affecting the assembly," or "I rise to a question of personal privilege." The chair directs him to state his question and then decides whether it is one of privilege or not. …
Questions of privilege may relate to the privileges of the assembly or only of a member … Questions of personal privilege must relate to one as a member of the assembly, or else relate to charges against his character which, if true, would incapacitate him for membership.
The transcript of convention proceedings showed that, when Johnson requested a "point of privilege," he did not indicate the nature of the privilege claimed or its urgency, nor did the convention chair inquire. Instead, the transcript of proceedings recorded the following:
DELEGATE JOHNSON: Mr. Chairman, I would request a point of privilege, please, sir.
GENERAL PRESIDENT HOFFA: You have it.
DELEGATE JOHNSON: My name is Tyson Johnson, elected delegate on the Hoffa/Keegel 2006 slate from Dallas, Texas. I will do my best not to delay or belabor these proceedings. But as many candidates have in the last several days submitted a CCER report to the election administrator, in reviewing Tom Leedham's CCER, I find a $10,000 contribution to his legal and defense fund from a Joseph Coyne, managing partner in one of the most anti-union law firms in this country.
(A chorus of "Boos" from the delegation.)
If I could, I would direct to Mr. Leedham, "Give it back, Tom."
(Cheering and applause)
GENERAL PRESIDENT HOFFA: Settle down. Let's get back to order here. Those comments were out of order. All right. Let's move on here. Everybody calm down. We will have an orderly convention.
Some 20 minutes later, the chair recognized delegate Christopher Roos, a candidate for vice president at large on the Leedham slate. Roos did not request a point of personal privilege nor did the chair grant one. Instead, the transcript records Roos' remarks as follows:
DELEGATE CHRISTOPHER ROOS: Yes, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to address the charges and lies and slanders by Tyson Johnson.
(A chorus of "Boos" from the delegation.)
Against Tom Leedham, myself, and my family.
GENERAL PRESIDENT HOFFA: Go ahead.
DELEGATE ROOS: Come on.
GENERAL PRESIDENT HOFFA: Wait a minute. Let's let the brother talk.
DELEGATE ROOS: You can keep going on with your lies and slander, Mr. Chairman, but you're going to hear the truth.
(A chorus of "Boos" from the delegation.)
GENERAL PRESIDENT HOFFA: Don't address me, talk to the audience. Go ahead. Go ahead.
DELEGATE ROOS: The mike's not - you can keep them going, Mr. Chairman.
GENERAL PRESIDENT HOFFA: Go ahead, go ahead.
DELEGATE ROOS: The lies and slanders that you have put on -
(A chorus of "Boos" from the delegation.)
GENERAL PRESIDENT HOFFA: Hold it down.
DELEGATE ROOS: Mr. Chairman, they can keep going, but they're going to hear the truth.
GENERAL PRESIDENT HOFFA: Make it short. Let's go.
DELEGATE ROOS: Mr. Chairman, Joseph Coyne is my cousin. He did donate $10,000 personally for myself and Tom Leedham. It was not a company, an employer -
Mr. Chairman, may I have the floor, please?
GENERAL PRESIDENT HOFFA: Go ahead. Keep talking.
DELEGATE ROOS: This was not an employer contribution, Mr. Chairman. This was a personal contribution, made on his own behalf, in memory of his father who was a union representative in his local for 20 years.
(A chorus of "Boos" from the delegation.)
GENERAL PRESIDENT HOFFA: Calm down. Let the brother talk.
DELEGATE ROOS: Joe Coyne is a patent attorney in a firm of 500 attorneys.
GENERAL PRESIDENT HOFFA: All right. Thank you. Thank you.
DELEGATE ROOS: The truth's going to come out, Mr. Hoffa. Let's have it on the floor.
(A chorus of "Boos" from the delegation.)
GENERAL PRESIDENT HOFFA: Very good. Thank you. Thank you. Let's move on. Let's have some order here. Please. All right. I want the delegates to sit down, would the delegates sit down? Brother, you've spoken about as long as Brother Tyson did; we got the point. I think we can move on now. Let's go on with the program. Thank you.
(Applause)
We've got the idea. Very good. Thank you. Okay. We're going to move on.
Some 20 minutes later, the chair recognized Tom Leedham to present a proposed amendment to the IBT constitution.
GENERAL PRESIDENT HOFFA: You've got an amendment, please step forward.
DELEGATE LEEDHAM: Yes, I do.
GENERAL PRESIDENT HOFFA: Amendment to the Preamble. Go ahead.
DELEGATE LEEDHAM: Yes, I do, Mr. Chairman. Before I make this motion, a point of personal privilege regarding the personal attack that was made -
(A chorus of "Boos" from the delegation.)
- a little earlier. May I respond to that, Mr. Chairman? May I respond to that?
GENERAL PRESIDENT HOFFA: Brothers, give him a moment, please.
DELEGATE LEEDHAM: May I respond to the personal attack that was made earlier?
GENERAL PRESIDENT HOFFA: Please go ahead. It's already been done once. Go ahead.
DELEGATE LEEDHAM: Mr. Chairman, a personal attack was made over here in regard to a contribution.
(A chorus of "Boos" from the delegation.)
GENERAL PRESIDENT HOFFA: Come on. It will go faster.
DELEGATE LEEDHAM: I just want the delegates to know that a protest has been filed; I'm sure it will be determined. But that contribution was made from a cousin of Chris Roos who is not labor attorney. He is a patent lawyer, and that will come out in the protest that's been filed. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for that.
The protest to which Leedham referred was filed by the Hoffa 2006 campaign and alleged that the Coyne contribution to the Leedham slate's legal and accounting fund was impermissible under the Rules. The protest was denied in Hoffa 2006, 2006 ESD 309 (June 26, 2006), aff'd, 06 EAM 56 (July 11, 2006).
During the morning session of the second day of the convention, the Leedham slate attempted to nominate 3 candidates for International trustee. Two of the candidates, Millie Gonzalez and Bill Gibson, were not present on the floor of the convention to accept the nomination. Sandy Pope, candidate for General Secretary-Treasurer on the Leedham slate, asserted from the convention floor that each candidate's written acceptance of nomination had been submitted to the Election Supervisor as required by the Rules. The Hoffa 2006 campaign filed a protest asserting that the nominations were invalid because written acceptances had not been submitted. After investigation, the Election Supervisor determined that the campaign had not submitted either candidate's written acceptance of nomination prior to the close of nominations for that office. The Leedham campaign subsequently withdrew the nominations of Gonzalez and Gibson. Hoffa 2006, 2006 ESD 310 (June 27, 2006).
Late in the afternoon of the second day of the convention, the chair recognized delegate Gary Kitchen, viz.
DELEGATE KITCHEN: Point of personal privilege, Mr. Chairman.
GENERAL PRESIDENT HOFFA: Go ahead, Gary.
DELEGATE KITCHEN: I'm the secretary-treasurer of Teamsters Local 880 in Windsor, Ontario, Canada. Mr. Chairman, my point of personal privilege is based on earlier today we had nominations for the positions of International Trustee. It's come to my attention now - I've just been handed a document that I need some clarification on and I feel the delegates to this convention need clarification on prior to them going to vote tonight.
We were assured earlier there was two absentee trustees from the Leedham TDU Slate that were not here to accept their nominations. We were assured on one case by Sister Pope that the proper paperwork had been signed and turned into the Election Officer. The document I hold in my hand right now not only indicates that Millie Gonzalez did not put the proper paperwork in, but also neither did Bill Gibson, which are both trustees on the Leedham TDU Slate, which based on those facts, both of those candidates have been withdrawn from the Leedham Slate and the delegates need to know that before they go in to vote tonight.
Now, I and the rest of the delegates would like to know two things. We were assured by Sister Pope that the proper paperwork had been turned in prior to that nomination meeting, so we want to know - 98 percent of us here want to know, was she lying when she came to the mike and said the paperwork had been filed?
And No. 2, what the other 98 percent of this delegation would like an answer on is will Tom Leedham step up and do the right thing, stop this election based on the numbers that are here and let's keep this union moving forward. Thank you.
Following adjournment of convention proceedings on the second day of the convention, delegates cast secret ballot votes on the candidates who had been nominated that morning for regional vice president and trustee. All candidates nominated for those positions achieved the 5% necessary to have their nominations confirmed, except for the 3 nominees for Western region vice president on the Leedham slate. None of the "points of personal privilege," whether supporting or opposing candidates on the Leedham slate, identified the Western region vice president candidates.
The next morning, the third day of the convention, the chair recognized IBT vice president Walt Lytle, viz.
VICE PRESIDENT LYTLE: General President Hoffa, I'd like to request a point of personal privilege, if I may.
GENERAL PRESIDENT HOFFA: Certainly, Walt, go ahead.
VICE PRESIDENT LYTLE: Yesterday morning's session, what took place was a nomination for Regional Vice Presidents and Trustees to this great International Union. During that presentation, there were two candidates nominated and seconded for the position of Trustees on the Leedham Slate. Ms. Pope assured the election officer, as well as the delegates, alternates and guests to this convention, that two of those individuals had done what was proper and accepted the nomination in writing in their absence.
As everyone here knows now, that was not true. And I would like to request that Ms. Pope come to a mike and make a personal apology to the Election Officer.
(Standing ovation.)
To make that personal apology, Mr. Chairman, to the Election Officer, the delegates, alternates and guests to this convention, and probably more importantly, to her own slate members who she outright lied to.
Thank you.
Ms. Pope, if you would, step forward to a mike for your apology.
(Applause.)
Ms. Pope, I guess, has left this delegation as TDU usually leaves us with lies and deceit once again. Thank you.
GENERAL PRESIDENT HOFFA: Okay. All right. All right. Thank you, Walt. All right. Let's move on here.
Later in the afternoon of the third day of the convention, the chair recognized Leonard Stoehr, a delegate from Local Union 728, viz.
DELEGATE STOEHR: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to request a point of personal privilege.
GENERAL PRESIDENT HOFFA: Go ahead.
DELEGATE STOEHR: Mr. Chairman, I'm an ABF road driver. Mr. Chairman, as you know we've had a lot of slander and assaults on each other's character flying back and forth in here this week. It seems to me that personal attacks should be kept outside of this convention hall, and I think all of my brothers and sisters agree with me on that.
(Shouts from the delegation.)
Inside this hall we should treat each other as brothers and sisters.
Mr. Chairman, I'd like to request that we all do union business and discuss proposals on their merits as union brothers and sisters -
GENERAL PRESIDENT HOFFA: All right. Keep it down.
DELEGATE STOEHR: - without any further attacks. I think our brothers and sisters deserve no less. Thank you very much.
After delegate Stoehr spoke, the convention took up the question of organizing workers at DHL. After the delegates voted to adopt a resolution on that subject and before hearing from the next scheduled speaker (the German trade union leader Rolf Buttner), the chair gave the floor to Sandy Pope. Her speech did not relate to a question then under debate, but responded to delegate Lytle's earlier challenge directed at her:
GENERAL PRESIDENT HOFFA: ... Mike 3.
DELEGATE SANDY POPE: Mr. Chairman, I guess I should be flattered that people have asked me to speak so many times.
(Shouts from the delegation.)
Do you want to hear me or not? You asked me three times, four times.
(Shouts from the delegation.)
Okay. We shouldn't be wasting our time dealing with personal attacks, but I'm not big on being used as a punching bag. First, you get someone to lie and slander me saying I cut my union's pension when I was the only trustee to vote against cutting benefits in our local.
Then you make a big deal over what I said about a nomination form and pretend you're upset. Walt, were you planning to vote for Millie?
Then you wait until you know I left the room to get up and trash me again. Your whips all knew because they watch where I go all the time. You may notice - I had four people in two minutes speak against me.
GENERAL PRESIDENT HOFFA: Let her talk, please.
DELEGATE POPE: It's getting pretty juvenile. Let's try debating the difficult issues facing our union instead of personal attacks.
GENERAL PRESIDENT HOFFA: Let the sister talk.
DELEGATE POPE: The Election Officer had the paperwork; it was late, so I won't apologize, no. The sister up there said something about taking something out of your purses. Well. I'm addressing it to all the delegates. I think we should be debating the issues and we should have an election and let's get on with it. Thank you.
GENERAL PRESIDENT HOFFA: Thank you. Let's move on.
Following adjournment of the third day of the convention, delegates cast secret ballots on the nominations that had been made that morning for vice presidents at large. All such nominees achieved the 5% necessary to have their nominations confirmed.
Another point of personal privilege was granted on the afternoon of the fourth day of the convention. This one was granted to Rick Hicks, delegate from Local Union 174. The transcript of Mr. Hicks' remarks states as follows:
DELEGATE HICKS: General President Hoffa, I would like to request a point of personal privilege.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. When I assembled the team to run against the TDU Dan Scott Slate, I reached out to the leaders, the rank-and-file leaders of our local union from all political factions. In fact, I have delegates on my team that were Tom Leedham delegates and supporters in 2001.
We came to this convention as uncommitted. We came willing to listen to all sides before making our individual decisions. Mr. Hoffa, after the last four days of watching and listening to this circus act by the TDU/Tom Leedham I-Want-to-Bullshit-the-Members-Again Slate -
(Laughter and applause)
- I can tell you that the nine delegates from Local 174 will all be casting their votes for you tonight, sir.
(Standing ovation)
On Tuesday, Local 174's Business Agent, Mark Babcock, attempted to get nominated to replace Jim Santangelo. Yesterday, Local 174's Secretary-Treasurer was nominated and he's attempting to replace Ken Hall. That's a goddamn joke.
(Applause)
Mr. Hoffa, I pledge to you this: You go get elected in November, I'll go back to Seattle and I'll get elected as Secretary-Treasurer, and together we will move this International Union forward.
(Applause)
Brothers and sisters, anyone who's come here like myself and my fellow delegates who are uncommitted and who have witnessed this display, this great display of solidarity over the last four days, I urge you to join me and my fellow delegates and let's get Mr. Hoffa nominated and let's get this union moving forward together. Thank you.
(Standing ovation)
(The delegates changed, "Hoffa.")
Later on the afternoon of the fourth day of the convention, the chair recognized delegate Robert "Big Dog" Terrell for a point of personal privilege, viz.
DELEGATE TERRELL: I would like to speak on some of the things that's been happening here as far as all these delegates, all of us delegates were elected by our membership, even though we might not - some people might not have the popular view of what we should be doing here. I don't look at them as enemies because we all have to go back to fight the employers. You know, the people on the other slate have been asked - told to go to remove theirself from the election. I'm asking them to do the right thing. That's what I'm asking. Because I know, truly, that they do have something to contribute to this union or they wouldn't have been elected by their members.
If you look at the numbers, I want them to be honest enough to take those sheets back to see that every local over the United States - with this being a democratic Teamster organization, that the majority rules. If you're saying you get a minimum of 5 percent, and you got enormous numbers in favor of this administration, this great administration, be honest with your members and let them know that the people across the country want you to lead us to where we have to go.
(Applause)
I'm appalled when I walk down the hall to see them having to be guarded, you know, because it shouldn't be that way. We're all brothers and sisters. We got the same enemy: The employer. That's the way I feel about it. You know, I don't have any hate for them, I don't have any animosity.
(Standing ovation)
I don't have any hate or animosity. I mean, the rude comments that were made to them, not letting them speak, there were things that they said that we were all in favor of, but they were shot down because we looked at who was saying it, not what they had to say. That's not right.
I feel that, I look at them not as enemies, I look at them as potential heroes, that they could come forth, come all up here together and say, "Look, you are going to run us into the future. We're going to follow you, we're going to work with you, and we're going to embrace the ideas and the vision that you have as our President."
I just wish that could happen. I mean, it would touch my heart to see them walk up and say, "Look, this is what the membership wants." You look at the sea of red out here. Come on, what does it take? You know, what does it take for you to understand this is what our membership wants?
When we came here as elected delegates, our delegates knew who we were supporting when we got here, knew who we were going to support when we got here. So what is that telling you? The majority, the majority of the locals all over the United States, want you leading us.
I just wish that they would do the right thing. If they really love this organization, if they really want to be honest to their members, take those sheets back and say, "Look, this is what this Teamster organization wants and this is where we're going to go by. We're going to support everything you do."
Stop tearing the administration down on the TDU web site, which ruins our volunteer organizers and organizers when the company doesn't have to spend money, just take them to that site to see how bad, you know, that our Teamster leadership is.
(Applause)
… I talked to some of the other brothers here, and they have the same thing. Do the right thing, don't make us spend money when you know you don't have a chance to win. You know, be right. Thank you.
GENERAL PRESIDENT HOFFA: Thank you, Brother. Moving on. Okay. All right. Thank you.
Some 20 minutes later, delegate Stoehr was recognized once again:
DELEGATE STOEHR: I'd like to request a point of personal privilege, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, our rank-and-file election is not a divisive process. It can unify the union membership by having the members choose its leader. The leadership will be stronger because the leaders will be able to say, "The members elected me one member, one vote."
I ask the membership if you feel we have the right to an election, then I urge each of you to nominate Tom Leedham to have the right to vote this fall. Thank you very much.
(Shouts of "Boos" from the delegation.)
GENERAL PRESIDENT HOFFA: All right. Over to Rome Aloise. Take it away, Rome.
Aloise was recognized for the purpose of discussing Costco as an alternative to Wal-Mart. He addresses this issue for several minutes, recounting a Teamster victory in a decertification election at Costco. He then said the following:
I also want to say something else. You heard about the great contracts Tom Leedham negotiates. When he was head of the Warehouse Division, and Sandy Pope working there, they put a representative into the East Coast negotiations. For those of you who are thinking about voting tonight for the Leedham Slate, think long and hard. They almost destroyed that East Coast contract. Tried to stick their nose in the West Coast contract and destroy that, at least us in the West kicked them out. You better think long and hard before you vote today.
I think we do have a right to election as members here. I don't think anybody's disputing that, in spite of what the brother tried to put on the floor. But when you think about the contracts in your local, you better think long and hard about who you want up at that podium representing you. And you don't want Tom Leedham.
(Applause)
Aloise then resumed discussing Costco.
None of the candidates on the Leedham slate accepted the invitation of delegates Kitchen and Terrell to withdraw their candidacies. After convention proceedings adjourned on the fourth day of the convention, delegates cast secret ballots on the nominations that had been made that morning for General President and General Secretary-Treasurer. All such nominees, including Leedham slate candidates Tom Leedham and Sandy Pope, achieved the 5% necessary to have their nominations confirmed.
While he was on the convention stage presiding over nominations for General President and General Secretary-Treasurer on the fourth day of the convention, the Election Supervisor talked with convention parliamentarian Brand. In the conversation, Brand told the Election Supervisor that, after delegate Johnson made his partisan remarks under the claim of privilege on the first day of the convention, Brand advised the convention chair that such remarks were out of order but that, because Johnson had been permitted to make them, the chair should permit other delegates to respond.
The fifth day of the convention took place after all secret ballot voting to confirm or reject floor nominations had concluded. The chair recognized delegate Kenneth Kelm, who thanked the chair for attending a picket line at Kelm's local union. Kelm then said the following:
I'd like to also say I've spent five days sitting next to Tom Leedham in the convention.
(Applause)
I've tried to get him to withdraw his candidacy and come to his senses. I don't think he's a stupid man - I think he's got some intelligence - I just think he's misguided. He needs to get together with us so that we can get back as a united union and fight these companies like we need to do.
I also would like to say I don't appreciate his candidate for Vice President At-Large, Chris Roos, coming to the Costco stores in Maryland and telling my members a pack of lies about what's wrong with their contract when he doesn't even know what's in the contract.
I would ask Tom to tell him that if he's going to come to Baltimore, at least tell the goddamn truth. Thank you, Mr. President.
(Applause)
Kelm was followed immediately at the microphone by delegate Patrick Kelly, who said the following:
DELEGATE KELLY: Point of personal privilege.
Many years ago, before the current administration came in, a prior administration moved in and shut down the conferences. When they did, unfortunately in the West there were 24 retirees, clericals, organizers and staff people, International Reps. Unfortunately, when that money was transferred from the Western Conference, these brothers and sisters that had worked for years and years lost their retiree medical coverage. This was a very embarrassing situation that was not able to be remedied until after the current administration came in.
Well, the fact of the matter is that the General President's at the time personal representative that dumped the retiree medical coverage was the brother that's trying to take Jim Hoffa's job. Now, my challenge to that person is to make amends, and the way that they could best make amends, we all know, would be to step forward and do the right thing and step back and not do something that only serves TDU, union-busters and the federal government. Thank you.
(Applause)
GENERAL PRESIDENT HOFFA: Okay, let's move on. Thank you, Patrick.
Finally, delegate Brad Slawson, Jr. was recognized. He stated the following:
I came to the microphone today for one reason. As an elected delegate … I see these numbers that are posted. There's 1,614 smart individuals in this room. I appreciate the fact that these people are looking out for the future of my membership. I may be at the end of my career, but my members aren't. I asked Tom Leedham to look at these numbers and ask himself if he's a true Teamster, and if he really cares about our membership and he cares about our future - what is it that 1,614 people - how are they wrong?
Tom, put down the political sword, do what's right, and come on over and let's build our future. Thank you.
(Standing ovation)
2. Video introduction of Keegel as alleged impermissible campaigning.
On the morning of the second day of the convention, General President Hoffa introduced General Secretary-Treasurer C. Thomas Keegel for Keegel's keynote address. A 1 minute, 55 second video immediately preceded Keegel's approach to the podium. The images were Keegel in various settings, including the warehouse floor, picket lines, addressing a throng on the Washington Mall, and orating before a formal gathering, such as a convention. Additional images were of union members listening to a speech or walking a picket line. The background music on the video was inspirational. The spoken words were entirely by Keegel. The first portion of the narration had Keegel in a conversational setting. The balance of the narration was drawn directly from recorded Keegel speeches. The narration was as follows:
[Conversational] Second only to my family, my union is my passion. I think we have to understand our history and be proud of it. Be proud of all of the things we went through, because we had to go through every single thing to be what we are today.
[Oration] So I draw strength from what our forefathers have done, and I draw strength from you, to do the best that I can because I owe so much to this great union for everything it's done for me, my family, and for working people in this country.
And I truly believe we are the conscience. I truly believe we stand for what's right. We stand for what's right. We're never afraid to stand up for our membership and working people. And that's what you do, day-in and day-out. And we do it well.
I love my country, but it is the most anti-union country in the free world because workers should have the right to organize, to get together, to talk to each other about bettering their lives and not have to worry about fear and intimidation from their employer. That's what we are going to change.
I'm proud of my union. I'm not a quitter. You're not a quitter. You wouldn't be here. We'll fight for what's right. It's about what's right for working people in this country. It's about what's right for our membership. It's about jobs. It's about jobs. It's about jobs.
I gotta tell you, brothers and sisters, we're going to grow this union. And with your General President, this is the most visible union in the free world. Working together, we have to win. We will win. We can win.
No words or images on the video directly or indirectly addressed or referred to the International officer election or Keegel's candidacy for re-election as General Secretary-Treasurer.
Following the video introduction, Keegel delivered a speech to the convention concerning the financial condition of the IBT.
Analysis
1. Campaigning from the floor of the convention.
The IBT convention "is the supreme governing authority of the International Union and shall have the plenary power to regulate and direct the policies, affairs and organization of the International Union." IBT Constitution, Article III, Section 1. The nomination of International officer candidates consumes a sizeable part of the convention's schedule and many of the delegates elected in the months leading up to the convention come with a partisan agenda to support and nominate particular candidates for International office. Nomination and seconding speeches, which must be delivered by elected delegates, are partisan statements in support of particular candidates.
Delegates spoke from the convention floor, in the time for convention business other than candidate nominations, and made statements that supported or attacked particular candidates for International office in their status as candidates. Just as the nomination and seconding speeches delivered on the mornings of the second, third and fourth days of the convention were by their nature campaigning, so too were the speeches quoted in this ruling.
The Leedham slate argues that the speeches quoted here - and the convention chair's tolerance of them - constituted improper use of IBT resources to campaign. The slate contends that "such blatant use of IBT resources to promote the Hoffa-Keegel Slate should not go unpunished. The Hoffa-Keegel Slate should be required to repay the IBT for every minute of time that was not spent on legitimate Convention business, but was spent on improper election campaigning from the podium and through their orchestrated abuse of points of personal privilege from the Convention floor."
With this argument, the protest apparently implicates Article VII, Sections 12(b) and (c) of the Rules without identifying them specifically. Those provisions state the following, in relevant part:
(b) All Union officers and employees, if members, retain the right to participate in campaign activities, including the right … openly to support or oppose any candidate [and] to aid or campaign for any candidate … However, such campaigning must not involve the expenditure of Union funds. Accordingly, officers and employees (and other members) of the Union may not campaign on time that is paid for by the Union. Campaigning incidental to regular Union business is not, however, violative of this section.
***
(c) Union funds, facilities, equipment … personnel, etc. may not be used to assist in campaigning unless the Union is reimbursed at fair market value for such assistance, and unless all candidates are provided equal access to such assistance and are notified in advance, in writing, of the availability of such assistance.
In Martinez, 2001 EAD 414 (July 27, 2001), aff'd, 01 EAM 87 (August 30, 2001), the Election Administrator found that the IBT had violated the Rules by displaying on the large screens employed at the 2001 International convention slogans that had been adopted by or become closely identified with the Hoffa campaign. The Election Appeals Master explained his affirmance of the decision as follows:
To put the matter as clearly as possible, the transmission of an explicitly defined partisan campaign slogan through union resourced facilities without adherence to the narrow and authorized level playing field access provided for in the Rules, is a per se violation of the Rules.
In Martinez, the IBT as an institution violated the Rules by using its resources to support a candidate. Here, by contrast, the alleged improper campaigning was carried out by individuals under circumstances that made clear that they spoke for themselves and not on behalf of the union. Accordingly, although the speeches occurred during an official union event, we decline to hold that they constituted improper use of "union resourced facilities" to do so.
But even were the speeches viewed as use of union facilities (specifically, the convention floor) to campaign, the convention chair (as advised by the parliamentarian) adhered "to the narrow and authorized level playing field access provided for in the Rules" by permitting all delegates wishing to deliver campaign speeches under claims of personal privilege to do so. Accordingly, we find that speeches at issue here did not violate the Rules.
Our decision is consistent with the analogous but not directly applicable language of Article VII, Section 5 of the Rules, which addresses campaigning at local union meetings. That provision states, among other things, that a local union "need not grant [a] candidate the opportunity to address the meeting for the purpose of campaigning unless a similar opportunity is granted to another candidate."
Further, "[i]f any candidate, whether a member or not, is permitted to address the Local Union meeting for the purpose of campaigning, any nonmember candidate or a credentialed representative of such candidate must be granted equal access and must be permitted to hear the other candidate(s) speak."
In addition, the provision states a local union "need not allot time for campaigning during any of its meetings. However, if campaigning during such meetings is permitted, the Local Union shall notify all candidates for the positions for which such campaigning will be permitted of the opportunity to speak at least five (5) days prior to the meeting and shall divide the time equally between those candidates (or candidates' credentialed representatives) who request an opportunity to speak."
Finally, the provision states that a local union "shall not discriminate or permit discrimination in favor of or against any candidate in conjunction with its meetings or otherwise. This requirement shall apply not only to formal presentations by or on behalf of candidates but also to informal campaign activities, such as, for example, comments on candidates during meetings …"
The Rules specify how local unions must manage partisan activity conducted at meetings. There is no requirement of access but, if access is to be provided, all candidates must receive advance notice and an opportunity to present at the meeting. The core principle that a local union cannot discriminate among candidates if it opens its doors to campaigning at meetings can be applied to the International convention as well with one key difference: delegates and candidates do not need notice that partisan activity will occur at the International convention. Indeed, the nomination function is highly partisan at its core. Thus, if improper campaign activity for a candidate occurs in the course of the International convention, the violation may be mitigated by allowing similar access to other candidates.
In this case, a different application of convention Rule 16 (requiring delegates to confine their remarks to a question under debate as convention business) could have limited or stopped campaign speeches. But whether the convention chair properly enforced Rule 16 in ruling on the remark catalogued here and followed proper parliamentary procedure is not in the Election Supervisor's authority to regulate. See DiDio, Conv-34 (July 19, 1996); Rodriguez, Conv-37 (July 18, 1996); Hindman, Conv-16 (July 18, 1996); Hoffa, Conv-8 (July 17, 1996); Bodine, Conv-17 (July 16, 1996); and Szymanski, Conv-9 (July 16, 1996). Our concern is whether floor activity, proper or not as a matter of convention procedure, violated the Rules and required a remedy.
Based on our complete review of the convention proceedings, we conclude that the convention chair, with advice of the convention parliamentarian, assured a level playing field by allowing any delegate who sought to make remarks in favor of or against any candidate to do so. Leedham slate candidates who were attacked, criticized or implored to withdraw their candidacies sought permission to speak and state their position, and received it with the assistance of the convention chair. Leedham, Roos and Pope did so. A Leedham slate supporter, Stoehr, also spoke in support of the Leedham slate. The decision to permit all who wished to respond to do so effectuated a rough justice consistent with the equal access rule that governs campaigning at local union meetings.
Finally, we note that all of the Leedham slate candidates who were criticized on the floor of the convention were successfully nominated to the general election ballot. On these narrow facts, we find no Rules violation and, accordingly, DENY this aspect of the protest..
2. Alleged union support of Keegel's candidacy.
Article VII, Section 12(c) declares that "[u]nion funds, facilities, equipment … may not be used to assist in campaigning unless the Union is reimbursed at fair market value for such assistance, and unless all candidates are provided equal access to such assistance and are notified in advance, in writing, of the availability of such assistance."
We hold that the short video introduction to Keegel's keynote address did not constitute campaign activity in support of his candidacy. Nothing in the video addressed or referred to the International officer election or Keegel's bid for re-election as General Secretary-Treasurer. While the video promoted Keegel's credentials as an ardent believer in the trade union movement and presented him in a positive light, we see no meaningful difference between the video presentation at issue here and an enthusiastic speech introducing the General Secretary-Treasurer that might otherwise be expected in a convention setting such as this.
For these reasons, 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
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. 20006-1416, 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 354
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
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
Stefan Ostrach
1863 Pioneer Parkway East, #217
Springfield, OR 97477-3907
saostrach@gmail.com
Jeffrey Ellison
510 Highland Avenue, #325
Milford, MI 48381
EllisonEsq@aol.com