February 22, 1996
VIA UPS OVERNIGHT
Dane Passo & Nick Petrecca
February 22, 1996
Page 1
Dane Passo
6811 W. Roosevelt Road
Berwyn, IL 60402
Nick Petrecca
5743 S. Kolmar
Chicago, IL 60629
Gerald Zero, Trustee
Teamsters Local Union 705
1645 W. Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, IL 60612
Walter Trakys
Teamsters Local Union 705
1645 W. Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, IL 60612
James P. Hoffa
2593 Hounds Chase
Troy, MI 48098
Dane Passo & Nick Petrecca
February 22, 1996
Page 1
Re: Election Office Case Nos. P-273-LU705-CHI
P-274-LU705-CHI
Gentlemen:
Dane Passo, a member of Local Union 705, filed a protest in Case No. P-273-LU705-CHI and Nick Petrecca, also a member of Local Union 705, filed a protest in Case No. P-274-LU705-CHI pursuant to the Rules for the IBT 1995-1996 International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”). Both protesters allege that Local Union 705 Secretary-Treasurer Gerald Zero and Local Union 705 Business Agent Walter Trakys filed internal charges against them in retaliation for their activities in support of the candidacy of James P. Hoffa for general president, including their intention to run for local union delegate to the International convention. Because the protests involve similar facts and legal issues, the Election Officer has consolidated the protests for decision.
Dane Passo & Nick Petrecca
February 22, 1996
Page 1
Mr. Zero responds that there is no evidence that the filing of the charges, done pursuant to the IBT Constitution and the local union constitution and bylaws, was retaliatory or otherwise in violation of the Rules. The local union also argues that the rights of the protesters have not been affected because they are ineligible to run for delegate. Additionally, Mr. Zero points out that there has been no action upon the charges by the local union executive board.
Regional Coordinator Julie E. Hamos investigated the protests.
By notice dated December 7, 1995, Mr. Zero and Mr. Trakys filed charges with the local union executive board against Mr. Passo and Mr. Petrecca. The Local Union 705 officers allege that the protesters violated the IBT Constitution and the local union constitution and bylaws because of their alleged disorderly conduct at the Local Union 705 monthly membership meeting held November 19, 1995.
In substance, the charges allege that the protesters “yelled and otherwise disrupted the meeting . . . shouted obscenities . . . continually interrupted the chair . . . cast aspersions on other members and officers, and they ignored numerous requests for order from the chair.”
The protesters responded to the charges by letters to Mr. Zero asserting that the charges are false and were “politically motivated.” Both protesters informed Mr. Zero that they support the candidacies of James P. Hoffa and Bill Hogan for International office and they expected to run for delegate. Mr. Zero and Mr. Trakys support the Ron Carey slate of candidates for International office.
Prior to the current period of increased campaign activity, Local Union 705 has previously disciplined the protesters based on charges of disruptive conduct at union meetings in November 1993, January 1994, and March 1994. One of the protesters, Mr. Passo, filed charges against the Local Union 705 Executive Board based on an allegedly unjustified effort by the local union president to curtail discussion at a December 1995 union meeting.
Article VIII, Section 11(f) of the Rules provides:
Retaliation or threat of retaliation by the International Union, any subordinate body, any member of the IBT, any employer or other person or entity against a Union member, officer or employee for exercising any right guaranteed by this or any other Article of the Rules is prohibited.
However, an alleged violation of this section is sustainable only if there is some evidence that connects the protested conduct with a guaranteed right under the Rules. Hasegawa, Case No. P-318-LU174-PNW, et seq. (February 5, 1996); Parisi, Case
Dane Passo & Nick Petrecca
February 22, 1996
Page 1
No. P-1095-LU294-PGH (Dec. 2, 1991). Here, the local union has the authority under its constitution and bylaws to impose discipline for disruptive conduct at union meetings. There is no evidence that the local union improperly exercised its authority to file charges against the protesters because of their political affiliations or electoral activities. Rather, the evidence reflects that the protesters and the incumbent officers have a history, unrelated to the delegate or International officer elections, of filing internal union charges against each other based on conduct at union meetings. “The fact that a union member . . . is a declared candidate for union office or is active in union politics does not ensure that the Election Rules will supply a remedy for every union-related matter in which that party believes he or she has been mistreated.” In Re: Golubovic, 95 - Elec. App. - 49 (KC) (December 28, 1995). There is no evidence in this case that the protesters have been singled out for internal union charges because of conduct protected by the Rules.
Based on the foregoing reasoning, the protests are DENIED.
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
Julie Hamos, Regional Coordinator