November 15, 1995
VIA UPS OVERNIGHT
Timothy W. Dunn
37 Southwick Road
North Reading, MA 01864
Re: Election Office Case No. P-226-LU259-ENG
Sir:
A pre-election protest was filed pursuant to Article XIV, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the 1995-1996 IBT International Union Officer Election (“Rules”) by Timothy W. Dunn, a member of Local Union 259. The protester challenges a determination by the Election Officer that he could not designate himself a slate of one candidate.
Associate Regional Coordinator David F. Reilly investigated the protest.
Local Union 259 had a nomination meeting for the delegate election on October 18, 1995. At the meeting, two candidates were nominated for one delegate position, one of which was the protester. Mr. Dunn accepted the nomination but did not indicate a desire to form a slate. On October 19, 1995, the protester contacted Mr. Reilly’s office and left a message that he wished to form a slate and requested a slate declaration form. Upon sending the form to the protester on October 20, 1995, the protester advised Mr. Reilly of his desire to form a one-person slate. After Mr. Reilly consulted with the Election Officer, he advised Mr. Dunn that he could not run as a one-person slate.
Mr. Dunn argues that the determination that he cannot run as a slate is an incorrect interpretation of the Rules because the Rules do not specifically prohibit one-person slates. The protester also points to Article II, Section 9. That section reads as follows:
Timothy W. Dunn
November 15, 1995
Page 1
Candidates for delegate and alternate delegate are permitted to seek nomination, be nominated, campaign and appear on the ballot as members of a slate of candidates, regardless of whether the slate is full, in accordance with Article IX of the Rules. All Local Unions shall permit slate voting.
Mr. Dunn argues that the last sentence stating “[a]ll Local Unions shall permit slate voting[.]” is rendered meaningless unless local unions which have only one delegate position can run as one-person slates.
The Rules are clear on this issue. In the Definitions at p. xvi, “[t]he term ‘slate’ means any grouping by mutual consent of two or more candidates.” Article IX of the Rules governs slate formation. This article clearly contemplates that a slate be composed of more than a single candidate. Specifically, Article IX, Section 1(b) states, “to form a slate, there shall be mutual consent between and among all candidates running on the slate.” (Emphasis supplied). The whole concept of a slate is that candidates sharing similar goals and objectives have expressed their unity of purpose in a formal manner. It is contradictory to this notion that an individual could constitute a slate. The cited subsection and other language referring to “candidates” and “mutual consent” in Article IX confirms that a single candidate cannot run as a slate.[1] The language referred to by Mr. Dunn simply provides that when two or more candidates desire to form a slate, all local unions shall permit such slate voting.
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 and Watkins
885 Third Avenue, Suite 1000
New York, NY 10022
Fax (212) 751-4864
Timothy W. Dunn
November 15, 1995
Page 1
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
David F. Reilly, Associate Regional Coordinator
[1]While a slate need not have a candidate for each of the delegate and alternate positions at issue in the election, a partial slate cannot be construed to contain only one candidate.