February 14, 1996
VIA UPS OVERNIGHT
Mark D. Murphy
842 Marrisa Drive
Florrisant, MO 63031
Re: Election Office Case No. P-406-LU600-MOI
Dear Sir:
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
Mark D. Murphy, a member of Local Union 600 and a candidate for delegate to the International convention. The protester asserts that the format of the local union's ballot is unfair to independent candidates as members may vote for an entire slate by checking one box rather than individual candidates.
The protest was investigated by Regional Coordinator Michael D. Gordon.
Local Union 600 held its nomination meeting on January 21, 1996. The protester was nominated as an independent candidate for delegate. The protester states that following the meeting, he and all the other candidates met with Regional Coordinator Gordon. According to Mr. Murphy and the Regional Coordinator, the participants at the meeting discussed the Rules and various issues relating to their candidacies, such as observers and when the ballots would be mailed. Mr. Murphy states that "we discussed slates and the fact that they would be first on the ballots. We also declared slates and drew for placement on the ballots." The Regional Coordinator distributed copies of the Rules to anyone who requested them and answered questions.
Mark D. Murphy
February 14, 1996
Page 1
The Rules, at Article II, Section 9, state that "[a]ll Local Unions shall permit slate voting." Article II, Section 10(a) gives the Election Officer the authority to "print a uniform ballot for all delegate and alternate delegate elections." Section 10(a) continues: "The ballot shall state that by placing a mark in a slate box, the voter will have voted for all the individual candidates on that slate."
The Rules further provide, at Article II, Section 10(b), that "[a]ll full and partial slates shall be listed on the ballots before the column(s) headed 'Independent Candidates.'" Repeating the statement quoted above, Section 10(b) states that "[t]he ballot shall provide an opportunity for a member to make one mark to vote for a slate."
The protester claims that in his 19 years as a member of Local Union 600, the members have always voted for individual candidates, regardless of whether the candidates belonged to a slate. He contends that allowing one vote per slate "is a very unfair advantage for slate candidates" which will result in the independent candidates having "no chance at all" as the voters are unaccustomed to this format and "many members will cancel out their own ballot."
As illustrated above, the Rules clearly state, in two places, that members may vote for an entire slate by marking the slate box. Thus, regardless of the protester’s view, the slate-voting option is required by the Rules. The Rules were Court-approved in a Decision and Order issued on August 22, 1995, specifically addressing and approving the slate-voting rules. United States v. IBT, No. 88 Civ 4486, 150 LRRM (BNA) 2210 (S.D.N.Y.).
Moreover, the Election Officer notes that Local Union 600 held a contested delegate election in 1991 and that its ballot contained slates. The instructions for the ballot at that time also permitted members to vote for an entire slate by marking one box. Therefore, the members of Local Union 600 have been exposed to this method before.
For the reasons set forth above, 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:
Kenneth Conboy, Esq.
Latham and Watkins
885 Third Avenue, Suite 1000
New York, NY 10022
Fax (212) 751-4864
Mark D. Murphy
February 14, 1996
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
Michael D. Gordon, Regional Coordinator