Protest Decisions

              March 27, 1996

VIA UPS OVERNIGHT

Terry Meadows

March 27, 1996

Page 1

Terry W. Meadows

3040 Turpin Road

Decatur, IL 62521

Larry Baker

Teamsters Local Union 916

2701 Dirksen Parkway

Springfield, IL 62702

Brenda Baker

Teamsters Local Union 916

2701 Dirksen Parkway

Springfield, IL 62702

Tom Streck

Teamsters Local Union 916

2701 Dirksen Parkway

Springfield, IL 62702

Terry Meadows

March 27, 1996

Page 1

Re:  Election Office Case No. P-573-LU916-SCE

Gentlepersons:

A 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 Terry W. Meadows, a member of Local Union 916.  Mr. Meadows alleges that Local Union 916 employees used union equipment while being paid by the union to file a protest with the Election Officer.  The Election Officer deferred the protest for post-election review pursuant to her authority under Article XIV, Section 2(f)(2) of the Rules.

This protest was investigated by Regional Coordinator Bruce Boyens.

Specifically, Mr. Meadows states that evidence of misuse of union resources was uncovered on March 1, 1996, by Diane Hendricks, an employee of Local Union 916.  The protester states that Ms. Hendricks witnessed Sue Fickas, a secretary employed at the local union, print out a protest letter written to the Election Officer by Larry Baker.[1]

Terry Meadows

March 27, 1996

Page 1

Article XII, Section 1(b)(3) of the Rules states, in relevant part, that “[n]o union funds or other things of value shall be used, directly or indirectly, to promote the candidacy of any individual.  Union funds, facilities, equipment, stationery, personnel, etc., may not be used to assist in campaigns . . .”  The use of union equipment, supplies or personnel to promote a candidacy or campaign is therefore prohibited under the Rules.

The Election Officer has held repeatedly that the filing of a protest is protected activity, and does not constitute support for a candidate or campaigning under the Rules.  Cook,

P-357-LU705-CHI, aff’d, 96 - Elec. App. - 113 (February 29, 1996); Hoke, P-322-LU89-SCE (January 29, 1996); and Scalf, P-097-LU705-CHI (August 16, 1995).  In each of these protests, the Election Officer looked to Article IX, Section 1 of the Rules, which states, “[a]ny member, Local Union or other subordinate body of the International Union or the International Union may file a protest with the Election Officer alleging noncompliance with the Rules, free from retaliation or threat of retaliation by any person or entity for such filing . . .”  Interpreting this Rules provision, the Election Officer found that no restrictions exist as to the protected right to file protests under Article XIV, Section 1.

Because the actions protested here do not constitute prohibited campaign activity, the Rules have not been violated.

Based upon the foregoing, Mr. Meadows’ 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 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

Bruce Boyens, Regional Coordinator