April 3, 1996
VIA UPS OVERNIGHT
Al Nosenzo
320-B Lansdale
Millrae, CA 98030
Christopher P. Welsh, President
Teamsters Local Union 216
1103 Airport Boulevard
S. San Francisco, CA 94080
Re: Election Office Case Nos. P-624-LU216-CSF
P-655-LU216-CSF
Gentlemen:
Two pre-election protests were filed, pursuant to Article XIV, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the 1995-1996 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”) by
Al Nosenzo, a member of Local Union 216 against Local Union 216 President and candidate for delegate Christopher P. Welsh. In P-624-LU216-CSF, Mr. Nosenzo alleges that
Mr. Welsh violated the local union’s bylaws on the handling of confidential information and election procedure by using the local union’s mailing list to send a letter to certain members of the local union. In P-655-LU216-CSF, Mr. Nosenzo again contends that Mr. Welsh violated the local union’s bylaws and the Rules by mailing campaign literature through the unauthorized use of Local Union 216’s rosters or mailing lists.
Mr. Welsh contends that the protester has no standing to file a protest because he is an inactive member who recently retired from the trade and will not be entitled to vote in the delegate election. On the merits, Mr. Welsh denies any allegations that he misappropriated or impermissibly used Local Union 216’s mailing lists. He contends that the addresses for both mailings came from a personal address book, which he compiled over the last 10 years as a union representative.
Al Nosenzo
April 3, 1996
Page 1
Because the protests involve the same protester and the same charged party, they are consolidated for decision. These protests were investigated by Regional Coordinator
Matthew D. Ross.
Regarding Mr. Nosenzo’s right to file a protest, Article XIV affords that right to “any member.” A member under the Rules is broadly defined as “any person who has fulfilled the requirements of membership in any Local Union and who has neither voluntarily withdrawn from membership nor been expelled or suspended from membership . . .” The right to file a protest is not confined to “members in good standing.” Mr. Nosenzo therefore is a member within the meaning of Article XIV and is entitled to file a protest.
The protested conduct in P-624-LU216-CSF involves a letter Mr. Welsh sent to at least some union members. The three-page letter plainly addresses his duties as a local union officer and the disputes in which he has been engaged with other local union officers. It is not campaign literature and does not address the delegate election in any manner. Even if evidence were presented that Mr. Welsh used local union resources, such as the membership list to send this letter, the protest does not address a violation of the Rules. Actions of local members and officers are not within the jurisdiction of the Election Officer unless there is a connection between these actions and the delegate or international officer elections. Golubovic, P-026-LU710-CHI (July 21,1995).
In P-655-LU216-CSF, the protested conduct concerns campaign literature supporting his candidacy for delegate that Mr. Welsh sent to about 160 local union members. The protester appears to allege that some of the local union’s rosters or membership lists were reported as missing several months ago at the membership and executive board meetings, and therefore Mr. Welsh must have used such lists for the mailing. There is, however, no evidence that Mr. Welsh used such lists to make his mailing.
Mr. Welsh maintains that the addresses for the mailing were derived from his personal address book, which he has been compiling for some 10 years, from information provided by members on sign-in sheets at membership meetings, from circulated petitions signed by members addressed to public officials, from open letters addressed to governmental officials, and from picket-duty records. One of the members who received the letter confirmed that he had signed petitions circulated at membership meetings, that he had performed picket duty for the local, and that he may have signed a petition protesting NAFTA.
In Chentnik, P-223-LU325-CHI (December 18, 1995), aff’d, 95 - Elec. App. - 52 (January 8, 1996), the Election Officer recognized that the use for campaign purposes of information such as member names and telephone numbers acquired by union officials in the course of their duties does not violate the Rules. While Mr. Welsh obtained members’ addresses during the course of his tenure as a union officer, there is no evidence that these were official union lists or that he obtained them for the purpose for campaigning for local union delegate. Accordingly, there is no evidence that using member addresses he acquired during his tenure in office to mail campaign literature violated the Rules.
Al Nosenzo
April 3, 1996
Page 1
Accordingly, the protests are 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
Matthew D. Ross, Regional Coordinator