This website uses cookies.
Office of the Election Supervisor for the International Brotherhood of Teamsters

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

February 28, 1996

 

 

 

VIA UPS OVERNIGHT

 


Anthony Montante

February 28, 1996

Page 1

 

 

Anthony S. Montante

64 Seneca Avenue

Oneida Castle, NY 13421

 

Shawn Shanahan

R.D. 1, Falls Road

Chittenango, NY 13037


Everett L. Campbell, Secretary-Treasurer

Teamsters Local Union 317

566 Spencer Street

Syracuse, NY 13204


Anthony Montante

February 28, 1996

Page 1

 

 

Re:              Election Office Case Nos.              P-421-LU317-PGH

P-422-LU317-PGH

P-438-LU317-PGH

CORRECTED

Gentlemen:

 

Anthony Montante, a candidate for delegate from Local Union 317, filed three protests pursuant to Article XIV, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the 1995-1996 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (Rules) against Local Union 317.  Because the protests involve the same parties and in significant part, similar facts and legal issues, the Election Officer has consolidated the three protests for decision.

 

Regional Coordinator William B. Kane investigated the protests.

 

I.  Posting of Local Union Plan Summary

 

In P-421-LU317-PGH, Mr. Montante protested the failure of Local Union 317 to post the local union plan summary at his work site, United Parcel Service on Northern Boulevard in East Syracuse, New York.

 


Anthony Montante

February 28, 1996

Page 1

 

 

The local union advises that it sent copies of the plan summary to its stewards by notice dated December 18, 1995, instructing them, consistent with Article II, Section 4(h) of the Rules, that the notice was to be posted immediately on work-site bulletin boards and was to remain on the bulletin boards throughout the entire delegate nomination and election period.

 

              The investigation disclosed, and the local union acknowledges, that on February 19, 1996, the local union plan summary was posted on only one of the five bulletin boards at the protesters work site.  Upon learning of this, the local union posted the plan summary on each bulletin board at the protesters work place.

 

Under these circumstances, the Election Officer concludes that further processing of this allegation is unwarranted because it has been addressed and remedied.  Accordingly, this portion of the protest is deemed RESOLVED.

 

II.  Posting Nomination List

 

Article II, Section 6(a) of the Rules requires the posting of nomination results within five days of the nomination meeting.  Local Union 317 held its nomination meeting on

January 28, 1996.  On February 1, 1996, after reviewing slate declaration forms submitted to him, the Regional Coordinator sent a copy of the nomination results by facsimile to the Local Union 317 secretary-treasurer.  Shortly thereafter, when a question arose as to the legitimacy of one of the signatures on a slate declaration form, the Regional Coordinator advised the local union not to post the nomination results.

 

The protester then filed P-421-LU317-PGH, in which he protested the failure of the local union to post the nomination results at his work site.  The Election Office finds that the Regional Coordinator validly instructed the local union to delay the posting of the nomination notice until his investigation was completed and she had made her determination as to forgery on one of the slate-declaration forms.  Subsequently, the Election Officer found in Shanahan, Case No. P-397-LU317-PGH (February 6, 1996), affd, 96 - Elec. App. - 91 (February 20, 1996), that a signature on a slate-declaration form had been forged and ordered that a revised list of candidates be posted.

 

The protester appealed the Election Officers decision in Shanahan, supra.  After filing his appeal, and prior to the appeal hearing, the protester filed P-438-LU317-PGH, in which he contended that local union remained obligated to post the original nomination results because the Election Officers decision in Shanahan was not final and binding.

 

The protesters reasoning with respect to the effect of a decision of the Election Officer is incorrect.  The Election Appeals Master has held that an order of the Election Officer takes immediate effect against a party found to be in violation of the Rules, unless the party obtains a stay from the Election Officer.  In Re: Lopez, 96 - Elec. App. - 73 (KC) (February 13, 1996).  Mr. Montante did not seek a stay in Shanahan.  Thus, the Election Officers order in that decision to post a revised list of the nomination results was effective upon the decisions issuance.

 

 


Anthony Montante

February 28, 1996

Page 1

 

 

Subsequently, in an opinion dated February 20, 1996, the Election Appeals Master affirmed the decision of the Election Officer in Shanahan.  Pursuant to Article XIV,

Section 3(i) of the Rules, this decision is also effective and binding as of its issuance unless it is stayed or overturned by the Court.  Accordingly, P-438-LU317-PGH, seeking posting of the nomination results without the revision ordered in Shanahan is DENIED.

 

III.  Harassment

 

In P-422-LU317-PGH, Mr. Montante alleges there was interference with

Mr. Shanahans right to run for delegate because Local Union Secretary-Treasurer

Everett Campbell threatened and harassed Mr. Shanahan in a telephone conversation on February 2, 1996.  The protester claims that he learned of the alleged interference in a conversation between the protester and Mr. Shanahan on February 7, 1996 in the employee parking lot at Yellow Freight in East Syracuse, New York, where Mr. Shanahan is employed.  Mr. Shanahan, however, states that Mr. Montante misunderstood the conversation and denies that Mr. Campbell ever threatened, harassed or otherwise interfered with his right to run for delegate.  Mr. Montante provided no other evidence to support his protest aside from the characterization of his conversation with Mr. Shanahan, which Mr. Shanahan refutes.  Accordingly, 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 & 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

William B. Kane, Regional Coordinator