April 4, 1996
VIA UPS OVERNIGHT
George Young & Paul Heiman
April 4, 1996
Page 1
George Young
26727 W. 226th Street
Spring Hill, KS 66083
Paul Heiman
20045 W. 119th Street
Olathe, KS 66061
Philip E. Young, President
Teamsters Local Union 41
Teamsters Joint Council 56
4501 Van Brunt Boulevard
Kansas City, MO 64130
George Young & Paul Heiman
April 4, 1996
Page 1
Re: Election Office Case No. P-423-LU41-MOI
Gentlemen:
George Young and Paul Heiman, members of Local Union 41 and candidates for delegate from that local union, filed a pre-election protest pursuant to Article XIV,
Section 2(b) of the Rules for the 1995-1996 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”). The protesters allege that materials from the Real Teamster Caucus were posted on the union bulletin board at the Clorox Company and that Local Union 41 materials and equipment (a fax machine and transmittal sheet) were used to transmit the materials, in violation of Article XII, Section 1(b)(1) of the Rules. The Election Officer deferred the protests for post-election review, pursuant to her authority under Article XIV, Section 2(f)(2) of the Rules.
This protest was assigned to Adjunct Regional Coordinator William Eisler.
Article XIV, Section 2(b) of the Rules requires that all pre-election protests be filed “within two (2) working days of the day the protester becomes aware or reasonably should have become aware of the action protested or such protest shall be waived.”
George Young & Paul Heiman
April 4, 1996
Page 1
The requirement to file protests promptly is an important part of the election process. The short time limits were designed to ensure that alleged violations of the Rules would be quickly brought to the attention of the Election Officer in order to afford the greatest opportunity for applying an effective remedy in the event a violation is found.
In Ruscigno, et al., P-144-LU337-MGN (October 4, 1995), aff’d, 95 - Elec. App. - 25 (KC) (October 18, 1995), the protest was filed 14 days after the material at issue, a publication of Local Union 337, was mailed to the local union’s membership. Because the protesters were not members of Local Union 337, the Election Officer stated that “(a) reasonable delay between the date the publication was first mailed and the date when the protesters could reasonably be expected to have seen it would naturally exist.” However, the Election Officer found that a period of 14 days “exceeds the limit of this reasonable delay.” In Mastrandrea, P-208-LU550-NYC (November 17, 1995), almost two months elapsed between the time the protester received the material he objected to and the date the protest was filed. The protester, a trustee for several local unions, had been required to travel away from the local headquarters where the material was received, and did not actually read the protested mailing until immediately before the protest was filed. The protest was found to be untimely.
Here, the materials were discovered on February 6 and 7, 1996, and protests were filed February 7 and 9, 1996. However, the materials protested were faxed from Local Union 41 headquarters to the Clorox Company for posting on the union bulletin board on June 10, 1995, and were apparently posted soon thereafter, and remained posted. This is a delay of approximately eight months between the conduct complained of and the date of the protest. Under the standard announced in Ruscigno and applied in Mastrandrea, this protest was filed long after the protesters should reasonably have been aware that the materials had been posted. Therefore, the Election Officer finds that the protest is untimely.
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
George Young & Paul Heiman
April 4, 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 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
William Eisler, Adjunct Regional Coordinator