March 6, 1996
VIA UPS OVERNIGHT
William G. Quattlebaum, Jr.
504 Chatham Avenue
Columbia, SC 29205
Lino Acanfora, Secretary-Treasurer
Teamsters Local Union 509
1213 State Street
Cayce, SC 29033
Re: Election Office Case No. P-387-LU509-SEC
Gentlemen:
A pre-election protest was filed pursuant to Article XVI, Section 2 (b) of the Rules for the 1995-1996 International union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”) by William J. Quattlebaum, a member of and a candidate for delegate in Local Union 509. Mr. Quattlebaum alleges that Lino Acanfora, secretary-treasurer of Local 509 and a candidate for delegate on a rival slate, was campaigning on union time and using union stationary in violation of the Rules. He states that Mr. Acanfora met with members at a United Parcel Service (“UPS”) work site and distributed a letter explaining his position on a disputed bonus provision.
Mr. Acanfora claims that distributing the letter and answering questions about a local contract issue at a meeting are not actually campaigning.
The protest was investigated by Adjunct Regional Coordinator Maureen Geraghty.
Article VIII, Section 2 forbids campaigning on union time and the use of union resources for campaigning.
William Quattlebaum
March 6, 1996
Page 1
The meeting and letter in question have their roots in a long-standing dispute within Local Union 509 and between the local union and UPS. The dispute concerns the appropriate procedure for removing a bonus plan from the collective bargaining agreement with UPS. The bonus plan had been the subject of a grievance scheduled for hearing in January 1996. In November 1995, Mr. Acanfora became a business agent for UPS at the local union. As part of his evaluation of matters pending within UPS, he determined that the grievance should be settled.
Acanfora and the president of Local Union 509 agreed with UPS to settle the grievance. To implement the settlement, they attempted to schedule a meeting on January 30, 1996 at the Columbia, South Carolina UPS hub work site to discuss the settlement with the Local Union 509 membership and to vote on the addition of the bonus plan.
As both the bonus plan and the appropriate process for deciding whether to keep it are hotly contested, the January 30 meeting began with considerable uproar. A group of about 50 employees challenged both the settlement with UPS and Acanfora’s handling of the matter. There was yelling, pushing and shoving.
Acanfora postponed the vote and left the work site, promising to return later in the day. In the meantime, he went to the local union headquarters and wrote a letter on union stationery, with his signature, explaining his position on the bonus program and how his position had evolved. In the letter Acanfora stated:
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me. It is my intention to visit the Hub frequently prior to your start times and in the evenings when you come in, as former agents have failed to do. I have driven a package car for twenty-five years for UPS and I am sensitive to the needs of UPS members. Feel free to call me at any time.
Acanfora returned to the UPS hub at 5:00 that afternoon, and spent an hour and a half distributing copies of the letter to members.
Mr. Quattlebaum protests both the meeting and the distribution of the letter. As a proponent of the grievance subsequently settled by Mr. Acanfora, and as a competing candidate, he objects to the quoted statements in the letter, and to the meeting itself, on grounds that the letter is actually campaign literature and the meeting was a pretext for campaign activity in the delegate election.
The Election Officer finds that there is a long-standing dispute within the local which predates the delegate campaign. The letter in question describes the issues in dispute and explains the basis for the local union’s decision to settle the grievance and put the issue to a vote. The letter does not mention the delegate campaign or other candidates for delegate. Both the letter and the meeting are appropriate communications with members about legitimate union business, and are not, therefore, within the prohibitions of Article VIII, Section 2. These actions by Mr. Acanfora do not constitute campaigning in violation of the Rules. Accordingly, the protest is DENIED.
William Quattlebaum
March 6, 1996
Page 1
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 N. Capitol Street, Suite 855, Washington, DC 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
Maureen Geraghty, Adjunct Regional Coordinator
J. Griffin Morgan, Regional Coordinator