Protest Decisions

OFFICE OF THE ELECTION SUPERVISOR

for the

INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS

IN RE: SAM BUCALO,                              )           Protest Decision 2016 ESD 297

                                                                        )           Issued: October 4, 2016

            Protestor.                                           )           OES Case No. P-369-092616-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 one or more supporters of Hoffa-Hall 2016 violated the Rules by posting campaign “pole stickers” on union-owned light posts in the parking lot of Local Union 100’s hall.

            Election Supervisor representative Dan Walsh investigated this protest.

Findings of Fact and Analysis

The protestor submitted photos of red Hoffa-Hall 2016 stickers with black lettering which he said were posted on four lamp posts in the local union parking lot.  President Dave Webster and vice president Ron Butt, both of whom ran on a slate that opposed Bucalo’s slate in the delegates election, agreed that the lamp posts shown in the photos were union property.

Bucalo discovered the stickers at the conclusion of a contract vote he conducted at the local union hall on Sunday, September 25, 2016.  He told our investigator he arrived around sunrise that day for the vote, which was to run until 1 p.m.  He did not observe the stickers on the posts when he arrived, but he said he did not specifically look at the posts to determine if anything was amiss.  When he left the hall after 1 p.m., he saw the stickers.  He took photos of them and then removed all of them from the posts.

Hoffa-Hall 2016 conceded the stickers were printed by the campaign.  However, the particular style of pole sticker seen in Bucalo’s photos was not available as merchandise for sale on the campaign website, through which purchaser identity might be traced.  Rather, a representative told our investigator the stickers were distributed free of charge at the 29^th IBT convention in Las Vegas in June 2016.  Webster and Butts denied to our investigator that they were responsible for posting the stickers.  They also denied any knowledge as to who might have done so.  Bucalo had no evidence that would identify the person or persons who posted the stickers, although he suspected responsibility lay with one or more members of the slate that opposed his slate in the delegates election. 

The Rules prohibit posting of campaign stickers on union property.  Black, 2001 ESD 338 (May 1, 2001); Hoffa-Hall 2016, 2015 ESD 31 (August 30, 2015).  Use of union fixtures for a campaign display also violates the provision of Article VII, Section 12(c) barring use of “Union ... facilities ... to assist in campaigning.”  Further, display of the stickers on local property violates Article XI, Section 1(a)(3), which prohibits a candidate from receiving campaign assistance from a union.  In addition, the Rules protect the right of members not to be involved in union politics if that is their decision, and use of the local hall or other union-owned fixtures to display one side’s campaign materials interferes with the rights under Article VII, Section 12(a) of all members of that local union who disagree or wish to remain uninvolved.  Finally, affixing difficult-to-remove adhesive stickers to smooth surfaces such as metal fence posts constitutes vandalism.  Willett, P863 (August 16, 1996).

For these reasons, we GRANT the 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.  “The Election Supervisor’s discretion in fashioning an appropriate remedy is broad and is entitled to deference.”  Hailstone & Martinez, 10 EAM 7 (September 14, 2010).

We direct local union president Webster to distribute this decision to all delegates and alternate delegates of Local Union 100 who attended the 29^th IBT convention to reinforce the requirement that union resources, including union-owned light posts on union property, may not permissibly be used for a campaign purpose under the Rules.  Such distribution of this decision shall be completed no later than Thursday, October 6, 2016.  President Webster is directed to submit a signed declaration of compliance to OES, made under penalty of perjury, no later than Friday, October 7, 2016.

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 297

DISTRIBUTION LIST (BY EMAIL UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED):