Protest Decisions

OFFICE OF THE ELECTION SUPERVISOR

for the

INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS

IN RE: SAM BUCALO,                              )           Protest Decision 2016 ESD 189

                                                                        )           Issued: May 4, 2016

            Protestor.                                           )           OES Case No. P-208-030416-ME     

____________________________________)                                                                  

Sam Bucalo, member and secretary-treasurer of Local Union 100, filed a pre-election protest pursuant to Article XIII, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the 2015-2016 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”).  The protest alleged that delegate candidate Dave Webster received an impermissible employer contribution from American Income Life, in violation of the Rules.

            Election Supervisor representative Dan Walsh investigated this protest.

Findings of Fact and Analysis

            In mail that arrived at his home on March 2, 2016, protestor Bucalo received a letter on local union letterhead entitled “Second Notice Regarding Your Member Benefits.”  The letter opened with “Dear Teamsters Local 100 Member,” and read in part: “Our records indicate that you have not designated your beneficiary or requested your certificate of coverage for the $3,500 Accidental Death and Dismemberment benefit provided to IBT 100 members at no cost to you.”  The letter detailed an accidental death and dismemberment benefit of $3,500 and a prescriptions, hearing, vision and chiropractic care discount card provided “in cooperation with American Income Life” that was available to members and retirees who return a reply card.  In addition, the letter stated that “Child Safe Kits” were also available at no cost.  The letter requested recipients to send in the reply card to AIL at a Waco, TX address.  The letter was printed on local union letterhead and signed by Dave Webster, principal officer of the local union; the names of elected officers, including protestor Bucalo, and business agents were printed at the top of the letter.

Bucalo alleged that the arrival of the AIL “second notice” six days before ballots were to be mailed had the purpose or effect of giving the incumbent officers a campaign advantage in the coming delegates and alternate delegates election.

Investigation showed American Income Life provides the same benefit to other Teamster local union members and retirees and to members of a wide variety of unions across the nation.  AIL periodically sends letters explaining available benefits to the members of local unions and seeking their participation; it sends follow-up letters such as the one at issue here to the members who do not respond to the initial mailing.  The letters appear on local union letterhead and are signed by the principal officer because experience has shown AIL that letters from the union gain better consideration from the recipient than unsolicited letters from an insurance company.  The printing and mailing of the letter are done at AIL's cost.  AIL also determines the timing of the mailing.

The text of the letter at issue here does not give credit to the local union leadership for obtaining the benefit, nor does it refer to local union politics or the delegates and alternate delegates election.  Investigation showed that there was no coordination between AIL and the local union concerning the timing of the letter.

Article VII, Section 12(c) prohibits use of union resources (including local union letterhead and mailing list) to assist in campaigning, unless all candidates are provided advance written notice of the availability of such assistance.  Article XI, Section 1(b)(2) prohibits employer assistance “where the purpose, object or foreseeable effect of the contribution is to influence, positively or negatively, the election of a candidate.”  In Hull, 2001 EAD 153 (February 10, 2001), aff’d, 01 EAM 37 (February 21, 2001), Election Administrator Wertheimer found that an insurance letter sent to members violated these provisions.  There, the letter was sent three weeks before the mailing of ballots in the delegates and alternate delegates election.  In contrast to past letters that merely announced benefits and encouraged recipients to sign up for them, the protested letter expressly praised the local union principal officer (also a delegate candidate) for obtaining the benefit the letter announced.  The Election Administrator found that the insurance letter constituted an impermissible employer contribution to the principal officer’s delegate campaign and that use of the local union mailing list to accomplish the mailing was an improper use of union resources.

In contrast to the situation in Hull, the letter at issue here is, in substance, the same as past letters from the insurance company.  It did not praise the incumbent officers or business agents for obtaining the benefit the letter announced.  It was sent only to those members who had not responded to a previous mailing.  The mailing was received approximately a week before the date ballots would arrive for the delegates and alternate delegates election at Local Union 100, and AIL, not the local union or its officers, independently decided when to mail the letter.  On these facts, we find that the letter does not constitute campaign material.  Therefore, we find no improper use of union resources and no employer contribution.

For these reasons, we DENY this 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:

Kathleen A. Roberts

Election Appeals Master

JAMS

620 Eighth Avenue, 34^th floor

New York, NY 10018

kroberts@jamsadr.com

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, 1050 17^th Street, N.W., Suite 375, Washington, D.C. 20036, all within the time prescribed above.  A copy of the protest must accompany the request for hearing.

                                                                        Richard W. Mark

                                                                        Election Supervisor

cc:        Kathleen A. Roberts

            2016 ESD 189

DISTRIBUTION LIST (BY EMAIL UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED):