Protest Decisions

OFFICE OF THE ELECTION SUPERVISOR

for the

INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS

IN RE: TERRY POST,                                )           Protest Decision 2016 ESD 349

                                                                        )           Issued: December 19, 2016

            Protestor.                                           )           OES Case No. P-398-102016-FW     

____________________________________)                      

Terry Post, member of Local Union 853, 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 comments posted to Teamsters United’s Facebook page “included physical violence and death threats against President Hoffa,” in violation of the Rules.

            Election Supervisor representative Deborah Schaaf investigated this protest.

Findings of Fact and Analysis

On October 18, 2016, the administrator of Teamsters United’s Facebook page posted an article titled, “Hoffa Campaign Fined for Cheating in Local Election.”  Attached to the protest were ten comments posted to the Facebook article, four of which included arguably threatening language, viz.

Too bad somebody can’t off this bastard!!!  He deserves to get what Roy Williams got!!  He damn sure didn’t fight for what his men like his dad even though his dad was in the mob!!!

Wouldn’t expect anything else.  They cheat all the time.  They got it down to a Science.  When the greased palms and gravy train don’t work they cheat.  I’d like to give Hoffa a swift kick in the ass.

Would like to see him take up permanent residence in a stadium endzone, somewhere!

That little fuckin piece of shit I would LOVE to kick the shit out of him

The protest alleged that the comments violated the Rules as unlawful threats. 

Article VII, Section 12(g) prohibits threats for activity protected by the Rules.  The Rules also recognize that sensational language is part of the election process, and the Rules do not bar that sort of zealous campaigning.  Jorgensen, 2000 EAD 72 (December 26, 2000); Rodriguez, 2000 EAD 45 (November 3, 2000); Yocum, 2000 EAD 18 (September 1, 2000) (loud, rude and obnoxious behavior of union steward as member attempted to have other members sign petition not unlawful); Wasilewski, 2000 EAD 14 (August 14, 2000) (words exchanged between two sides in the context of petitions being signed); Zuckerman, 2005 ESD 38 (December 15, 2005) (no violation where campaigner’s conduct was “loud, rude and obnoxious” but stopped short of physical violence).  

To find an improper threat, activity must constitute a palpable threat of imminent harm.  Ramos, 2006 ESD 65 (February 3, 2006); Galvan, 2011 ESD 130 (February 21, 2011).  However, a threshold must be crossed before threats or violence will be found to violate the Rules.  Teller, P1086 (December 27, 1991) (finding violation where a local trustee grabbed a member by the arm, tapped a finger into his chest, grabbed him by the jacket collar and pushed him against the wall); Stefanski, P282 (January 22, 1996), aff’d, 96 EAM 94 (February 21, 1996) (finding violation where a member grabbed another’s arms in a menacing manner and ordered him to leave the facility where he was campaigning); Smith, 91 EAM 51 (January 29, 1991) (finding violation where a member was struck on the back of the head for expressing unpopular political beliefs); Rogowski, P859 (August 13, 1996) (violation to pull the protestor’s shirt collar and push him from behind with his elbow in front of other members.); Leedham Slate, 2006 ESD 319 (July 9, 2006), aff’d , 06 EAM 57 (July 21, 2006) (punching of a member who insulted candidate for International office while singing karaoke violated the Rules); Berg, 2006 ESD 397 (December 6, 2006), aff’d, 06 EAM 80 (January 8, 2007) (while mere bumping “belly to belly” may be excusable, punching candidate because of candidacy violated the Rules); Pope, 2011 ESD 309 (August 5, 2011) (knocking member down because of campaign emblem on shirt violated Rules); Deszcz & Esquivel, 2011 ESD 310 (August 12, 2011) (physical attack of members because of their political beliefs violates the Rules).  “Violence ... has absolutely no place in the conduct of fair, honest and open elections, pursuant to the Election Rules.”  Smith, supra.

Applying this standard, we find that the Facebook comments at issue here do not violate the Rules.  They were made in writing by individuals who were not in the physical presence of the person who is the object of their ire, and therefore are neither a palpable threat nor one of imminent harm. 

Accordingly, 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 349

DISTRIBUTION LIST (BY EMAIL UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED):