Protest Decisions

October 23, 1995

VIA UPS OVERNIGHT

Gary W. Kitchen

October 23, 1995

Page 1

Gary W. Kitchen

October 23, 1995

Page 1

Re:  Election Office Case No. P-139-LU938-CAN

Gentlepersons:

A pre-election protest was filed pursuant to Article XIV, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the 1995-96 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”) by

Gary W. Kitchen, a member of Local Union 880, against Charles Thibault, an International vice president and a candidate on General President Ron Carey’s slate.  Mr. Kitchen contends that union and employer contributions were made by Local Union 938 when a copy of a letter in support of the Ron Carey slate and an accreditation petition were sent by facsimile from Local Union 938 to Local Union 880.  Mr. Kitchen also contends that Local Union 938 office staff and equipment were used to support the candidacy of Mr. Thibault and the Ron Carey Slate. 

This protest was investigated by Regional Coordinator Gwen K. Randall.

Gary W. Kitchen

October 23, 1995

Page 1

Attached to the protest were partial copies of two documents.  The first was a letter from Mr. Thibault to “All Principal Officers.”  The letter states as follows:

As you are well aware the 1996 International convention is approaching quickly.  With this there is much work to be done in order that we may secure Canadian autonomy in the fashion that would serve our needs best.  In order to secure space in the October/November issues of the International magazine we must now post member signatures on Ron Carey slate petitions . . . These petitions must be signed and returned no later than Thursday, August 24, 1995.  I realize this is a very tight time frame in which to achieve this, but I know if we all work as a team and remember that our own futures are directly tied to the outcome of this election we will achieve out goal of 1000 signatures.

The other document was a copy of the accredited candidate petition for the Ron Carey slate.  The top of the copy indicates it was sent via facsimile from the officers of Local Union 938.

On September 11, 1995, Mr. Thibault sent the Regional Coordinator a letter which stated, in pertinent part:

There has never been any Local Union or Employer contributions made to Teamster Local Union 938 on behalf of Charles Thibault or any other Candidate.

Although an error was made, in my absence, by sending out the referred[-]to document through the use of Teamster Local

Union 938's fax machine, Teamsters Local Union 938 staff or other equipment has not been used in any way for the preparation of the referred to document.

Mr. Thibault concluded the letter by stating he would reimburse Local Union 938 for the cost involved as soon as the amount had been determined.  A copy of this letter was sent to the protester.

On October 6, Mr. Thibault sent to the Regional Coordinator a copy of the invoice from Local Union 938 to cover the facsimile charges and a copy of a personal check made out to the local union for $17.70.  The invoice reflects: 1) itemized facsimile long distance charges to eight different Canadian local unions plus tax, totaling $10.73; 2) the transaction cost for nine faxes, totaling $4.66; 3) and an administration fee of 15 percent, totaling $2.31.  The invoice total is $17.70, the same amount as the check tendered to the local union by

Mr. Thibault.   A copy of the cover letter, the invoice and the check was sent to the protester.

Gary W. Kitchen

October 23, 1995

Page 1

The Rules, at Article XII, Section 1(a)(3), prohibit the use of union funds to promote the candidacy of any individual.  This prohibition extends beyond monetary contributions to the use of union facilities, equipment, stationery, and personnel.  The use of the Local

Union 938 fax machine to send out campaign material for Mr. Thibault was a violation of the Rules.

There is no evidence that any other contributions were made by Local Union 938 to support Mr. Thibault’s candidacy or the Ron Carey slate.

Accordingly, the protest is GRANTED.

Although the Election Officer has found a violation in this case, she finds it unnecessary to issue any remedy.  It appears from the documents submitted by Mr. Thibault that he has fully reimbursed Local Union 938 for its use of the fax machine to promote his candidacy and that of the Ron Carey slate.  Moreover, he sent copies of his letters to the protester and in his letter dated September 11, 1995 advised the protester as follows:  “I would like to express my thanks to the complainant for bringing this error to my attention and can assure him that this type of error will not be made in the future.”  Under the circumstances, Mr. Thibault has fully complied with any remedy that would have been ordered by the Election Officer.

Any interested party not satisfied with this determination may request a hearing before the Election Appeals Master within one day of receipt of this letter.  The parties are reminded that, absent extraordinary circumstances, no party may rely upon evidence that was not presented to the Office of the Election Officer in any such appeal.  Requests for a hearing shall be made in writing and shall be served on:

Kenneth Conboy, Esq.

Latham & Watkins

885 Third Avenue, Suite 1000

New York, NY 10022

Fax (212) 751-4864

Copies of the request for hearing must be served on the parties listed above as well as upon the Election Officer, 400 North Capitol Street, Suite 855, Washington, D.C. 20001, Facsimile (202) 624-3525.  A copy of the protest must accompany the request for a hearing.

Sincerely,

Barbara Zack Quindel

Election Officer

cc:              Kenneth Conboy, Election Appeals Master

Gwen K. Randall, Regional Coordinator