February 22, 1996
VIA UPS OVERNIGHT
Jo Pressler
February 22, 1996
Page 1
Jo Pressler
Teamsters Local Union 705
1645 W. Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, IL 60612
Hoffa/Hogan Slate
c/o James P. Hoffa
2593 Hounds Chase
Troy, MI 48098
ROCK 103.5
60 E. Chestnut Street
Chicago, IL
Ron Carey Slate
35 E Street, N.W.
Apt. 110
Washington, DC 20001
Jo Pressler
February 22, 1996
Page 1
Re: Election Office Case No. P-365-LU705-CHI
Gentlepersons:
A pre-election protest was filed pursuant to Article XIV, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the 1995-1996 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election ("Rules") by Jo Pressler, a member of Local Union 705, on behalf of the Ron Carey slate. The protester charges ROCK 103.5, a Chicago radio station, with violating Article XII, Section 1(b)(1) of the Rules by broadcasting an interview with James Hoffa during "prime air time" on January 25, 1996, and the Hoffa/Hogan slate with violating the same provision by accepting a contribution from the radio station, an employer.
Mr. Hoffa, on behalf of the Hoffa/Hogan slate, responds that he has no control over the editorial policies of ROCK 103.5 and "had no knowledge or involvement whatsoever in how [the] radio station . . . utilized an interview I did with them."
Regional Coordinator Julie E. Hamos investigated the protest.
Article XII, Section 1(b)(1) of the Rules states, in part, as follows:
Jo Pressler
February 22, 1996
Page 1
No employer may contribute, or shall be permitted to contribute, directly or indirectly, anything of value, where the purpose, object or foreseeable effect of the contribution is to influence, positively or negatively, the election of a candidate. No candidate may accept or use such contribution. These prohibitions are not limited to employers that have contracts with the Union; they extend to every employer, regardless of the nature of the business . . .
The protester states that ROCK 103.5 broadcast an interview it conducted with Mr. Hoffa from approximately 9:40 a.m. to 9:50 a.m. on January 25, 1996, during what the protester characterizes as "prime air time." In addition to broadcasting the interview, the protester states that from 6:30 a.m. to 9:40 a.m. the radio station "repeatedly promoted the upcoming interview as well as announcing 'Hoffa/Hogan in '96.'"
The term "campaign contribution" is defined by the Rules as "any direct or indirect contribution of money or other thing of value where the purpose, object or foreseeable effect of that contribution is to influence, positively or negatively, the election of a candidate . . ." The Election Officer, however, has consistently excluded the non-union-financed media from the coverage under this provision of the Rules. In Hasegawa, P-161-LU41-MOI (October 24, 1995), the Election Officer stated:
While recognizing that the definition of the term “campaign contribution” in the Rules “is intended to be broad to further the purpose of the Consent Order and the Election Rules,” the Election Officer in Scott, Case No. P-969-IBT (October 18, 1991), refused to construe the term to include “newspaper or magazine articles published by entities which are not owned or whose editorial policies are not controlled by candidates or committees acting on behalf of candidates.”
See also Brennan, Case No. P-971-IBT (October 16, 1991).
In the instant protest, Ms. Pressler has not alleged, nor is there any evidence, that
Mr. Hoffa has any ownership interest in, or any control over, ROCK 103.5. Accordingly, the Election Officer finds that the broadcast by the station of Mr. Hoffa's interview during prime air time and the promotion of his interview by the radio station is not a "campaign contribution" subject to the Rules, and that the Hoffa/Hogan slate did not violate Article XII, Section 1(b)(1) by accepting a contribution from an employer.
For the foregoing reasons, the protest is 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:
Jo Pressler
February 22, 1996
Page 1
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