April 30, 1996
VIA UPS OVERNIGHT
John Carter
494 Kime Avenue
West Islip, NY 11795
Richard Volpe, Secretary-Treasurer
Teamsters Local Union 550
6 Tuxedo Avenue
New Hyde Park, NY 11040
Re: Election Office Case No. P-709-LU550-NYC
Gentlemen:
A pre-election protest was filed pursuant to Article XIV, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”) by John Carter, a member of Local Union 550 and candidate for delegate on the Carey Team - “Not One Step Back” slate. He alleges that Local Union 550 Secretary-Treasurer Richard Volpe (candidate for delegate on the Local 550 “First” slate), threatened him at a March 23, 1996 meeting by saying, “Stay away from the route sales drivers; it’s none of your fucking business getting involved in something you know nothing about . . .” Mr. Carter states that as a result of the threat he did not campaign with route sales drivers, or at two depots, for the rest of the campaign. The Election Officer deferred the protest for consideration post-election, pursuant to Article XIV, Section 2(f)(2) of the Rules.
This protest was investigated by New York City Protest Coordinator Barbara Deinhardt.
Ballots were counted in the local union delegate election on April 15, 1996. Mr. Volpe defeated Mr. Carter for Local Union 550’s single delegate position.
John Carter
April 30, 1996
Page 1
It is undisputed that Messrs. Carter and Volpe engaged in a heated argument on March 23, 1996 at a Local Union 550 shop meeting at Jamaica Transport, where Mr. Carter is chief steward. It is also undisputed that Mr. Volpe made the statement quoted above, or one similar to it. The parties disagree, however, over what Mr. Volpe meant. Mr. Carter states that Mr. Volpe was telling him not to campaign. Mr. Volpe responds that Mr. Carter had been interfering with route sales drivers over a possible strike that Mr. Carter did not understand, and Mr. Volpe was telling Mr. Carter to stop.
The Election Officer’s investigation revealed the following background. Mr. Carter took vacation the week of March 10. On March 13, while on vacation time, he campaigned for about 15 minutes in the parking lot of a depot in Coram and for one hour or more at a depot in Medford. While Mr. Carter was at the Medford depot, several route sales drivers asked him what he thought about the local union’s plans for a route sales driver strike. Such drivers are paid on a commission basis and the local union believed that a recent merger of employers was allowing products to be moved in the local union’s area without commissions being paid. Mr. Carter said that a strike may not be the best course. He returned to work the next week.
The shop at Jamaica Transport had for some months been considering a seniority issue arising from the inclusion of 14 members laid off when a facility closed in New Jersey. There was a meeting on this issue on Tuesday, March 19, 1996, which Mr. Carter did not attend. He states that he did not know about the meeting, due to his vacation. Mr. Volpe believed that Mr. Carter did know about it and distributed a letter to all Jamaica Transport members strongly criticizing Mr. Carter’s absence.
The seniority issue was also the subject of the meeting on March 23, when Messrs. Carter and Volpe argued. At the beginning of the meeting, Mr. Carter defended himself against the criticisms in Mr. Volpe’s letter. He states that “It got pretty heated. I called him a liar. He called me a commie bastard.” Mr. Carter then asserts that he and Mr. Volpe started talking about campaigning. As to the alleged threat that is the basis of this protest, Mr. Carter gave three versions. In his protest, he alleged that Mr. Volpe made the statement quoted in the first paragraph of this decision. In a subsequent written statement to the Protest Coordinator, he asserted that Mr. Volpe said, “I heard you were out to Coram and Medford. Stay the fuck away from my salesmen. They’re none of your fucking business.” In a later telephone call with the Protest Coordinator, he stated that Mr. Volpe said, “I hear you have been out on the Island campaigning; stay the fuck away from the route drivers.” According to Mr. Carter, “From that day forward I stayed away from the depots and the route salesmen.”
Mr. Volpe responds that they did not argue about campaigning. He states that certain route sales drivers had complained to him about the fact that Mr. Carter had spoken against sriking over the sales commission issue. According to Mr. Volpe, Mr. Carter does not understand the issue because Mr. Carter is compensated by the hour, not on commissions. Thus, Mr. Volpe states that when he told Mr. Carter on March 23 to stay away from route sales drivers, he was telling Mr. Carter not to interfere in a matter that Mr. Volpe believed he did not know anything about.
John Carter
April 30, 1996
Page 1
The Protest Coordinator interviewed six witnesses to the argument between Messrs. Carter and Volpe. All remembered the heat of the discussion and Mr. Volpe’s statement that Mr. Carter should stay away from the route sales drivers. One witness stated that Mr. Volpe was attempting to “intimidate and coerce John Carter to limit his campaign by not leafleting or talking to route sales drivers.” Another witness stated that “it was unbelievable the way Volpe talked to Carter” and recalled that the argument involved a “commission grievance--can’t remember exactly.”
Article VIII, Section 11(f) provides,
Retaliation or threat of retaliation by the International Union, any subordinate body, any member of the IBT, any employer or other person or entity against a Union member, officer or employee for exercising any right guaranteed by this or any other Article of the Rules is prohibited.
Retaliation based on delegate candidacy or campaigning violates this provision. Phelan, P-711-LU550-NYC (April 24, 1996). In this matter, however, the Election Officer credits Mr. Volpe’s contention that this interchange did not involve campaigning for the delegate election for the following reasons: It is undisputed that Mr. Carter voiced opposition to the proposed strike 10 days before the March 23 meeting. Mr. Carter’s original version of what Mr. Volpe said at that meeting, quoted in the first paragraph of this decision, is most reasonably interpreted as Mr. Volpe objecting to Mr. Carter’s interference, rebuking
Mr. Carter for “getting involved in something you know nothing about.” Furthermore, it is undisputed that Mr. Volpe only told Mr. Carter to stay away from those members affected by the commission issue: the route sales drivers. The relation to the strike is corroborated by the witness who recalled that the argument involved a “commission grievance.” Thus, the Election Officer finds that the sequence of events and the weight of the evidence on this record support Mr. Volpe’s explanation of the basis of the interaction.
In making this finding, the Election Officer notes that Mr. Carter’s memory of
Mr. Volpe’s statement was not consistent through the course of the investigation. His first version, as noted above, is an objection to interference, not campaigning. The third version, however, directly implicates campaigning. The Election Officer credits Mr. Carter’s earlier, fresher recollection.
To the extent that Mr. Volpe’s statements were ambiguous, Mr. Carter could have sought clarification before ceasing to campaign among such drivers and then charging
Mr. Volpe with preventing him from exercising such a fundamental right under the Rules. In the circumstances of this case, the Election Officer finds that the protester could not have reasonably believed that Mr. Volpe was threatening him if he campaigned amongst the route drivers.
For the foregoing reasons, the protest is DENIED.
John Carter
April 30, 1996
Page 1
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
Barbara Deinhardt, New York City Protest Coordinator