IN RE: MARIA ASHLEY ALVARADO
and HOFFA-HALL 2011, Protestors
Protest Decision 2010 ESD 33
Issued: October 5, 2010
OES Case Nos. P-033-092510-FW
& P-035-092710-FW
Maria Ashley Alvarado, member, president and delegate candidate from Local Union 601, timely filed a pre-election protest pursuant to Article XIII, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the 2010-2011 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election ("Rules"). The protest alleged that Lucio Reyes, delegate candidate and principal officer of Local Union 601, impermissibly used local union resources to advance his delegate candidacy.
Hoffa-Hall 2011 timely filed a pre-election protest adopting by reference the allegations set forth in Alvarado's protest, alleging further that the Gegare campaign benefited from Reyes' alleged violations, and asserting that the Gegare campaign should be directed to remedy the alleged violations.
The protests were consolidated for investigation and decision. Election Supervisor representative Michael J. Miller investigated them.
Findings of Fact
Protestor Alvarado heads a slate of delegate and alternate delegate candidates called the No Mas Lucio slate. Reyes heads a slate of delegate and alternate delegate candidates called the We Don't Make Promises, We Deliver slate (hereinafter, the Reyes slate).
On Friday, September 24, the Reyes slate assembled a number of supporters in an upstairs conference room of the Local Union 601 hall in Stockton, California to prepare a campaign mailing. Among those attending to work on the mailing were Reyes' wife, Angela; local union business agent Juanlucio Reyes and his girlfriend; business agent Paul Montano and his wife; Howard Schock, a retired member of the local union and husband of Local Union 601 office manager Patty Schock; and office manager Patty Schock.[1] The mailing used the local union's bulk permit. The workers affixed members' addresses to the mailing, using printed, adhesive stickers that were run by the local union from its TITAN terminal the previous day, September 23. The work took 2 hours to complete.
At the meetings for candidates conducted immediately after the close of nominations on August 18 and again on August 25, instructions for candidate mailings were distributed. They read as follows:
- All requests must be in writing and submitted to Secretary-Treasurer Lucio Reyes specifying what portion of the membership is to receive the mailer and what type of postage is desired. You may use the Bulk Mail Permit of Local 601.
- Membership labels for mailings cost $120 for each mailing. When requesting, in writing, membership labels must specify what order you want the labels run (by zip code, alphabetical, etc.), what dates you want (from beginning to ending dates), what categories you want run (regulars, seasonal, service fee, stewards, etc.) and if you do not want the entire Local which company you want run.
- If you want a mailing house to label and mail your campaign literature, the address labels will be delivered directly to the mailing house at the written, specified date and time by Patty Schock.
- If you plan to do the mailer yourself, you may request, in writing, to reserve the meeting room upstairs at Local 601 in Stockton or the meeting room at Local 601 in Yuba City.
- If you do your own mailer at the Union Hall, you must provide your own crew. You must pay wages for Office Manager Patty Schock to observe and distribute all membership labels for the entire time you're working on your mailer. She cannot assist you with your actual mailer, but will give each member of your crew one (1) page of labels when the blank page is returned to her; you will receive the second page, and so forth. This process has been established in the past, to insure that no labels with the member's information on them will leave the Local. The Locals are open from 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. If you do not finish in one day you must reserve a second day or how ever many it takes for you to complete your mailer.
In accordance with this written procedure, Lucio Reyes on August 19, 2010 made written request to officer manager Schock to reserve the hall's conference room for September 24 to do his slate's mailer. A copy of this request was produced to our investigator.
On September 23, Reyes made written request to Patty Schock for mailing labels for the Reyes slate mailing. Reyes' request specified that he wanted the "entire Local" run, in zip code order and to include "Actives, 03's and Service Fee." The request specified the date range he sought and stated that he had given Delia Perez, local union TITAN operator, a check in the amount of $120 as payment for the labels. Reyes' written request and a copy of the $120 check Reyes gave to Perez were produced to our investigator.
The Reyes slate used the local union's bulk permit. The mailer was sent to 6,048 recipients by third-class pre-sort, for a total postage expense of $812.31. Reyes paid the cost by check. Postal receipts and a copy of the check were produced to our investigator.
Of the persons who participated in the labeling of the mailers in the local union conference room on September 24, two were local union employees. Juanlucio Reyes and Paul Montano, both business agents, made written request on September 21 to take vacation time on September 24. These requests and the checkstubs for these individuals were produced to our investigator and confirm that the men were on vacation time on that date.
Patty Schock, local union office manager, was also present, but in her official role. She told our investigator that she dispensed sheets of address labels to members of the Reyes slate mailing crew one sheet at a time, in accordance with the written procedure. Reyes paid her 2 hours pay at her hourly rate of $24.93 for the 2 hours the addressing took. A copy of Reyes' check to Schock was produced to our investigator. Schock's checkstub, also produced, shows that she was not also paid by the local union for the time she spent dispensing address labels to the mailing crew.
The remaining persons who participated in the mailing were spouses, a girlfriend, or members who were not working that day.
Alvarado's No Mas Lucio slate sought to do a mailing as well. Alvarado initially made written request to Reyes on September 1, 2010 for "membership labels exactly as the membership labels you will be using for your mailer." After making that statement, Alvarado then specified that she sought "[m]embership labels for all the companies under Local 601 contracts, [and] [m]embership labels to include all regulars, seasonal, service fee, and stewards, active or on withdrawal." She asked that the labels be provided on September 19 and that she be permitted to use the union hall to assemble the mailing on September 20.
Alvarado subsequently abandoned this request and substituted for it a request dated September 14 that mailing labels be delivered to Presort, a mail house in Stockton that she engaged for the mailing. She repeated the substance of what she had sought in the September 1 request with respect to the categories of labels, except that the September 14 request also sought labels for members employed by SUSU, a Stockton employer where members of Local Union 601 are employed. The September 14 request omitted the request for use of the local union hall, as Presort was to label and otherwise prepare the mailing. The September 14 request also specified that the membership labels "must come from the IBT, or if someone at Local 601 is delivering them this person must be accompanied by Adrianna Verdin or Ashley Alvarado." In the alternative, the request stated that the labels could be sent to Presort electronically.
In response to the September 14 request, Reyes gave written authorization to the IBT on September 16 to transmit the mailing list as specified by Alvarado directly to Presort by electronic means. The IBT did so on September 17.
Alvarado subsequently abandoned use of Presort and, on September 20, made written request to Reyes that the labels be transmitted electronically to Chimes Printing, a mail house in Richmond, California. Reyes gave his written authorization to the IBT on September 21, and the IBT on that date transmitted the address information electronically to Chimes, where it arrived after business hours. Hoffa-Hall paid the cost of the Alvarado mailing, which Chimes completed on September 24. In addition, Hoffa-Hall had Chimes perform the remedial mailing to which Hoffa-Hall was entitled under Aloise et al, 2010 ESD 22 (August 27, 2010), aff'd, 10 EAM 6 (September 3, 2010). The IBT transmitted a second copy of the identical address list for Local Union 601 to Chimes after business hours on September 21 for this remedial mailing. The remedial mailing was also completed on September 24, 2010.
Mailing lists are generated using the IBT's TITAN system. Office clericals designated at each local union as TITAN operators input membership data, including names, addresses, and employers, into the system. In addition, persons in the TITAN system are classified by membership type, such as active, withdrawal, steward, service fee, retired, and the like. Richard Bell, executive assistant to IBT General Secretary-Treasurer, supervises the TITAN system, among other duties. He told our investigator that changes of address for local union members are input into the system by local union TITAN operators as part of everyday local union business, and data input at field locations are immediately reflected on the IBT computer's central database. Accordingly, a local union's membership data available to the IBT at a given moment will match in every particular the membership data available to the local union at the TITAN terminal in the local union hall. However, given the continuous updating of the TITAN system at the local union level, Bell said that a membership list generated on labels at the local union on a given day will differ from the electronic list the IBT transmits to a mail house on an earlier or later day, if updated information is input into TITAN after the first list is generated and before the second.The membership list the IBT transmitted to Chimes Printing for the No Mas Lucio mailing was received there electronically from the IBT after business hours on September 21. The labels used for the Reyes slate mailing were printed in the afternoon of September 23, approximately 1½ business days later. As such, for the TITAN codes the two mailing list requests had in common, the only differences in the lists were the new members and changes of address of existing member input in the intervening day and a half.
Local Union 601 employs 2 TITAN operators, Delia Perez in the Stockton office and Magdalena Navarro in Yuba City. Both work 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. daily. Both told our investigator that they update the mailing list as part of their daily responsibilities, as new members and changes of address for existing members are given them by business agents and the office manager. Perez told our investigator that the number of changes she input into TITAN during the week of September 20 was normal; Navarro thought that the changes she input was higher than normal. Neither could estimate the number of changes input during that week, nor could either estimate the number of changes input on September 22 and the morning of September 23, the dates that intervened between the time the IBT transmitted the list for No Mas Lucio and the time the local union generated the address labels for the Reyes slate.
Updating the membership list at Local Union 601 is an ongoing project. Schock, Perez and Navarro each told our investigator that, at any given time, 1,000 names on the 7,000 member list may have bad addresses. Schock attributed the volume of bad addresses to the significant seasonal and transient population in the local union's membership. She told our investigator that business agents periodically obtain updated member information from employers through updated seniority lists. In addition, stewards supply changes of address for members. Further, the local union garners address changes from mail sent to members that is returned as undeliverable by the U.S. Postal Service. Schock told our investigator that she had a master membership list printed around the same time as the Reyes mailing labels were produced, and she was updating the master list with addresses received from the sources cited in preparation for a newsletter mailing and local union officer elections to be held later this Fall. However, she denied that she gave updated addresses to the team producing the Reyes slate mailing outside of whatever had been input into TITAN as a matter of routine work. Verdin, who was aware of the master list in Schock's office, stated that, as far as she knew, Schock did not take updated addresses upstairs to the Reyes' supporters who prepared the mailing. Various individuals who worked on the Reyes slate mailing said that all the address labels they affixed to mailers were printed; none was handwritten (a handwritten label might suggest an address change made by Schock for the slate mailing that was not yet input into TITAN). Juanlucio Reyes and Montano, both business agents, denied that they had stepped up their efforts to obtain updated member addresses or that they had been asked to do so. No other witness stated that the process and pace of obtaining and inputting address changes in TITAN was anything other than routine during the week of September 20.
Analysis
Alvarado's protest makes the following allegations:
- that Reyes and Local Union 601 business agents Juanlucio Reyes and Paul Montano, Local Union 601 office manager Patty Schock, and several volunteers, used "an upstairs office to stuff, label and stamp their mailer for the campaign. I believe they all took a vacation day so as to attempt to hide the fact that they were again using Local Union resources."
- that the local union mailing list was intentionally manipulated after the date Alvarado requested the list for her campaign mailing so as to eliminate bad addresses from the list Reyes used for his campaign mailing.
- that mailing labels paid for by Local Union 601 were offered to the Reyes slate and were not offered to Alvarado's slate.
- that the address labels were possessed by the Reyes slate team. According to the protest: "I am not even sure if it is allowable for the slate to actually have the mailing list in their hands as I thought that it was supposed to be supplied directly by the IBT to the mailing house, or at least delivered to the mailing house so that candidates did not have possession of the list."
- that "eligibility lists have been manipulated and that Lucio Reyes continues to use Local Union assets to assist his campaign."
We address these allegations in the order listed.
We reject Alvarado's complaint that Reyes slate supporters impermissibly used the upstairs office to assemble their mailing. Article VII, Section 12(c) states that union funds "may not be used to assist in campaigning … unless all candidates are provided equal access to such assistance and are notified in advance, in writing, of the availability of such assistance." We note that the use of a local union hall to prepare a candidate mailing is partly for the convenience of the local union; its use protects the union's interest in preventing the membership list from being duplicated without authorization by permitting local union employees to supervise the labels while they are being applied to the mailers. In the case of Local Union 601, the candidates were notified at the candidates meeting that the upstairs conference room at the Stockton hall could be reserved for use in assembling candidate mailings. The notice was read out to the candidates and delivered in writing. Alvarado acknowledged to our investigator that she was offered the use of the room. Her first written request for a mailing list reflects that knowledge because it requests reservation of the room to use in labeling her mailer. Her complaint that the Reyes slate violated the Rules by using the room is therefore without merit.
We also reject the insinuation in Alvarado's protest that Juanlucio Reyes, Montano and Schock, all of whom are employees of the local union, violated the Rules by participating in the mailing. The protest alleged, "I believe they all took a vacation day so as to attempt to hide the fact that they were again using Local Union resources." Article VII, Section 12(b) states that union employees "may not campaign on time that is paid for by the Union." However, "campaigning during paid vacation … is … not violative of this section." Id. Oral and documentary evidence produced during our investigation demonstrated that Juanlucio Reyes and Montano requested and were granted vacation time for September 24, the date the mailing was assembled. Accordingly, their participation did not violate the Rules. Schock attended the mailing, but in her role as local union office manager to dispense sheets of labels and to insure that the labels were used for the candidate mailing and for no other purpose. In accord with the written procedure for candidate mailings, the Reyes slate paid Schock her hourly rate for the 2 hours she spent providing such supervision. She otherwise took the day off so she was not paid twice for the same time. These facts demonstrate that Alvarado's allegation that these employees improperly collected union pay while engaged in campaign activity is without merit.
We reject Alvarado's allegation that the local union mailing list was manipulated after she received her list so as to correct bad addresses and permit the Reyes slate mailer to reach more members than those reached by the Alvarado mailer. Evidence showed that updating bad addresses is part of the everyday routine at Local Union 601. No evidence was presented that activity in this regard was stepped up between the date the mailing list was generated electronically for Alvarado and the date it was produced in label form for the Reyes slate. Indeed, given the short time frame involved, 1½ days, and the evidence from Alvarado supporter Verdin that change of address inputting was normal that week, there is no credible evidence of a substantial difference in the 2 versions of the list used by the competing slates. Accordingly, we find that this protest allegation lacks merit.
We reject Alvarado's next allegation that mailing labels paid for by Local Union 601 were offered to the Reyes slate and were not offered to her slate. The written procedure for candidate mailings, provided to all candidates following nominations (Alvarado included), stated that candidates could purchase mailing labels for $120 for each mailing. Oral and documentary evidence demonstrates that Reyes did so for his slate. Alvarado's September 1 letter to Reyes reflects this notice because the letter asks the local to produce membership labels for her slate's mailing. She later withdrew that request and asked that a list be transmitted electronically to the mail house her campaign used. Her protest's allegation that she and her slate were not offered mailing labels is without merit and, in light of her September 1 letter, disingenuous.
We also reject Alvarado's allegation that it is not "allowable for the [Reyes] slate to actually have the mailing list in their hands as I thought that it was supposed to be supplied directly by the IBT to the mailing house, or at least delivered to the mailing house so that candidates did not have possession of the list." Again, the written procedure for candidate mailings states expressly that labeling can be done by candidates and their supporters. Thus, "[i]f you plan to do the mailer yourself, you may request in writing, to reserve the meeting room" at the local union hall for that purpose. Further, "[i]f you do your own mailer at the Union Hall, you must provide your own crew. You must pay wages for Office Manager Patty Schock to observe and distribute all membership labels for the entire time you're working on your mailer. She cannot assist you with your actual mailer, but will give each member of your crew one (1) page of labels when the blank page is returned to her; you will receive the second page, and so forth. This process has been established in the past, to insure that no labels with the member's information on them will leave the Local." These instructions make clear that a mailing list is not put into candidates' hands. Instead, sheets of printed labels are handed out and used one-by-one until labeling is concluded. Investigation showed that Alvarado knew, before filing the protest, that this was the procedure. Her September 1 letter to Reyes expressly asked "to reserve the union hall for the purpose of working on the mailer on 9/20/10 for as long as it takes to finish the job." Although Alvarado ultimately elected to have her mailing prepared by a mail house, also an option under the candidate mailing procedure, her decision not to do the mailing with a crew at the union hall does not affect the right of another candidate or slate to do so. Accordingly, we find this protest allegation to be without merit.
Finally, Alvarado alleges that "eligibility lists have been manipulated and that Lucio Reyes continues to use Local Union assets to assist his campaign." Alvarado offered no evidence to support this conclusory allegation. A protest without evidence will be denied. Reyes, 2010 ESD 12 (August 4, 2010).
For the foregoing reasons, we DENY Alvarado's protest in its entirety.
The Hoffa-Hall protest is derivative of the Alvarado protest. Hoffa-Hall adopts by reference the allegations set forth in the Alvarado protest and makes no further allegations. Hoffa-Hall asserts that, if any allegation of Alvarado's protest is proven, a remedy against the Gegare campaign is warranted. As we have denied Alvarado's protest in its entirety, we also DENY the Hoffa-Hall 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, 1801 K Street, N.W., Suite421 L, 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
2010 ESD 33
DISTRIBUTION LIST (BY EMAIL UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED):
Bradley T. Raymond, General Counsel
International Brotherhood of Teamsters
25 Louisiana Avenue, N.W.
Washington,D.C. 20001
braymond@teamster.org
David J. Hoffa
Hoffa Keegel 2011
1100 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Ste. 730
Washington D.C. 20036
hoffadav@hotmail.com
Ken Paff
Teamsters for a Democratic Union
P.O. Box 10128
Detroit, MI 48210-0128
ken@tdu.org
Barbara Harvey
1394 E. Jefferson Avenue
Detroit, MI 48207
blmharvey@sbcglobal.net
Fred Gegare
P.O. Box 9663
Green Bay, WI 54308-9663
kirchmanb@yahoo.com
Scott D. Soldon
Previant Goldberg
155 North River Center Drive, Ste. 202
P.O. Box 12993
Milwaukee, WI 53212
sds@previant.com
Fred Zuckerman, President
Teamsters Local Union 89
3813 Taylor Blvd.
Louisville, KY 40215
fredzuckerman@aol.com
Robert M. Colone, Esq.
P.O. Box 272
Sellersburg, IN 47172-0272
rmcolone@hotmail.com
Lucio Reyes, Secretary-Treasurer
Teamsters Local Union 601
745 E. Miner Ave.
Stockton, CA 95202
lreyes601@sbcglobal.net
Maria Ashley Alvarado, President
Teamsters Local Union 601
745 E. Miner Ave.
Stockton, CA 95202
europeartmuseum@yahoo.com
Christine Mrak
2357 Hobart Avenue, SW
Seattle, WA 98116
chrismrak@gmail.com
Michael J. Miller
1611 Granville Ave., #8
Los Angeles, CA 90025
miller.michael.j@verizon.net
Kathryn Naylor
Office of the Election Supervisor
1801 K Street, N.W., Suite 421 L
Washington, D.C. 20006
knaylor@ibtvote.org
Jeffrey Ellison
214 S. Main Street, Ste. 210
Ann Arbor, MI 48104
EllisonEsq@aol.com