Protest Decisions

            Mike Zajac, member of Local Union 317, filed a pre-election protest pursuant to Article XIII, Section 2 of the Rules for the 2010-2011 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”).  The protest alleged that Local Union 317 president John Pekoff violated the Rules by maintaining a Hoffa 2006 sticker on the door of his local union office, in violation of the local union’s “no campaigning” policy.  John DePietro, also a member of Local Union 317, filed a separate protest alleging that business agent Mark May violated the same local union policy by handing a bundle of campaign stickers to local union member Scott Thompson while inside the local union hall.

            These protests were consolidated for investigation and decision.  Election Supervisor representative Maureen Geraghty investigated them.

Findings of Fact and Analysis

            Article VII, Section 12(d) provides that “no restrictions shall be placed upon candidates’ or members’ preexisting rights to solicit support, distribute leaflets or literature, conduct campaign rallies, hold fund-raising events or engage in similar activities on … Union premises.  Such facilities and opportunities shall be made available to all candidates and members on a non-discriminatory basis.” 

            Local Union 317 has established and seeks to enforce a “no campaigning” policy at its local union hall in Syracuse, New York.  The policy, if enforced in a non-discriminatory manner over a significant period, will establish that there is no pre-existing right to campaign inside the local union hall.  Violation of a “no campaigning” policy properly established and enforced will constitute a Rules violation.[1]

            The enforcement of Local Union 317’s “no campaigning” policy has included non-discriminatory prohibition on campaign activity during general membership meetings, and distribution of campaign material inside the union hall before, during and after such meetings.  Its enforcement also included prohibiting protestor DePietro from soliciting accreditation signatures on behalf of General President candidate Pope inside the union hall in November 2010. 

            The protests here allege that a local union officer and a local union business agent have violated the policy.  Thus, protestor Zajac alleged that a Hoffa 2006 sticker is affixed to an organizing poster that is mounted on the office door of local union president Pekoff.  Investigation verified the allegation.  Pekoff stated that the sticker was affixed to the poster on his door several years ago, following the completion of the 2006 election of International officers.  He stated that protestor DePietro requested him to remove the sticker “about a year ago” and that Pekoff refused the request, concluding that the sticker related to a past election and therefore did not violate the “no campaigning” policy.  Upon Zajac’s filing of his protest, Pekoff removed the sticker from his office door.

            A campaign sticker is made with the object of influencing the election of a candidate and constitutes campaign material.  In this case, even though the sticker identified the year of the election as 2006, it constitutes campaign material because it shows support for a candidate in the current election.  For this reason, Pekoff violated the local union hall’s “no campaigning” policy by maintaining the campaign sticker on his office door.  Accordingly, we GRANT the Zajac protest.

            Investigation of DePietro’s protest showed that a craft meeting of the Coca-Cola unit was held at the local union hall on September 11, 2011.  Business agent Mark May was present at that meeting.  He told our investigator that following the meeting, he discussed union business with local union member Scott Thompson in the otherwise empty assembly room of the local union hall for approximately 15 minutes and then asked Thompson if he wanted some Hoffa bumper stickers to “hand out to the guys.”  Thompson followed May to May’s office, where May grabbed a handful of bumper stickers from a box that was beneath a coffee table.  Thompson confirmed these facts.  May’s conduct constituted two violations of the “no campaigning” policy.  First, he impermissibly stored campaign material inside the union hall.  Ostrach & Mandaro, 2000 EAD 29 (October 2, 2000), aff’d, 00 EAM 7 (October 2000) (union facilities may not be used to store campaign literature); see also, Hodgson v. Mine Workers, 344 F. Supp. 17 (D.D.C. 1972); Usery v. Stove, Furnace & Allied Appliance Workers, 547 F.2d 1043 (8^th Cir. 1977).  Second, May impermissibly distributed the campaign material to a member in the union hall.  Accordingly, we GRANT the DePietro protest.

Remedy

When the Election Supervisor determines that the Rules have been violated, he “may take whatever remedial action is deemed appropriate.” Article XIII, Section 4. In fashioning the appropriate remedy, the Election Supervisor views the nature and seriousness of the violation as well as its potential for interfering with the election process.

            We order the officers and employees of Local Union 317 to cease and desist from displaying, storing or distributing campaign inside the local union hall.  We further order May to remove all campaign material from the hall forthwith.

            We further order the local union to post the notice attached to this decision on the union bulletin board at the local union hall.  Such posting must be completed within two days of issuance of this decision.  Within one day after the posting has been completed, the local union shall submit an affidavit of compliance to OES. 

            We do not order that the notice be posted on union bulletin boards at worksites under the local union’s jurisdiction.

            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, NY  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., Suite 421 L, Washington, D.C.  20006, all within the time prescribed above.  A copy of the protest must accompany the request for hearing.