June 20, 1996
VIA UPS OVERNIGHT
James P. Hoffa
June 20, 1996
Page 1
James P. Hoffa
2593 Hounds Chase
Troy, MI 48098
Craig Merrilees, Communications Coordinator
International Brotherhood of Teamsters
25 Louisiana Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20001
Ron Carey, General President
International Brotherhood of Teamsters
25 Louisiana Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20001
John Sullivan, Associate General Counsel
International Brotherhood of Teamsters
25 Louisiana Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20001
James P. Hoffa
June 20, 1996
Page 1
Re: Election Office Case No. P-796-IBT-SCE
Gentlemen:
A pre-election 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
James P. Hoffa, a candidate for general president.
Mr. Hoffa alleges that General President Ron Carey, IBT Spokesperson Craig Merrilees and unnamed persons in the IBT Communications Department used union resources to attack Mr. Hoffa’s candidacy in a newspaper article, which appeared in the Home News and Tribune on May 26, 1996. Mr. Hoffa cites statements attributed to Mr. Merrilees “attacking a Hoffa-backed candidate for International office and [ ] defending Carey from campaign-related criticisms.”
In response, Mr. Merrilees, the Communications Coordinator in the IBT Communications Department, denies that his comments to the Home News and Tribune supported or attacked the candidacies of Mr. Carey, Mr. Hoffa or any other person.
This protest was investigated by Regional Coordinator Bruce Boyens.
James P. Hoffa
June 20, 1996
Page 1
The Home News and Tribune is a New Brunswick, New Jersey, newspaper of general circulation. It is not union-financed. The article in question, entitled “Hoping to go national” and subtitled “Local Teamster president campaigning on challenger Hoffa’s national ticket,” appeared in the Business Section on May 26, 1996. The article generally profiles Donato “Danny” DeSanti, who is identified in the article as a candidate for International vice president on Mr. Hoffa’s slate. It contains several quotes from Mr. DeSanti criticizing Mr. Carey’s administration of the IBT. Mr. Hoffa cite the following paragraphs as Rules violations:
Teamsters spokesman Craig Merrilees accused DeSanti of aligning himself with a faction that wants to return to the corrupt pre-Carey era.
The treasury stands at $30 million after hitting a low of
$7 million in April 1994, Merrilees said. It dropped that low primarily because old guard Teamsters quadrupled strike benefits five years ago and paid themselves multiple pensions, he said.
Merrilees defended Carey for negotiating contracts that prevented the conversion of full-time jobs with benefits to part-time jobs without benefits.
“Ron Carey was the first Teamster leader in more than a decade to stand up and strike the trucking companies and stop their concession demands.”
The article was written by Steven Klein, a Home News and Tribune business writer. The section of the article cited by the protester appears after several statements attributed to
Mr. DeSanti which criticize Mr. Carey’s negotiation of the national freight-hauling contract and the UPS contract.
Mr. Merrilees states that he fields a number of calls from reporters each day. He contends that he responded to Mr. Klein’s questions as he does to all reporters. He reports that his standard procedure is to advise reporters that he will respond to factual questions about union matters, but as to any inquiries concerning the election campaign, the reporter would need to call the campaign. Mr. Merrilees then asks reporters if they understand these ground rules to responding to questions.
As to his specific responses to the questions posed by Mr. Klein, Mr. Merrilees states that he was aware that the article was about Mr. DeSanti but was unaware of the nature or content of the overall article. He states that he never mentioned Mr. DeSanti’s names during the interview. At one point during the interview, Mr. Merrilees told Mr. Klein in response to certain allegations against Mr. Carey that some of these charges are made by union officials who oppose reform.
James P. Hoffa
June 20, 1996
Page 1
Mr. Merrilees denies accusing Mr. DeSanti of aligning himself with a faction that wants to return to the corrupt pre-Carey era, but as set forth above, admits making a comment about union officials who oppose reform. The reporter, Mr. Klein, states that he does not recall the exact statements Mr. Merrilees made to him but does not recall Mr. Merrilees making any statements about Mr. DeSanti or Mr. Hoffa in the telephone interview. Mr. Klein states that he wrote the statement about the “corrupt pre-Carey era” into the article because he believed that it reflected what is being said “on the street” about the IBT election and candidates.
The Election Officer previously has distinguished campaign speech and other forms of permissible communication in the context of a statement attributed to an IBT spokesperson by a newspaper reporter. In Hoffa, P-093-IBT-PNJ, aff’d in relevant part, 95 - Elec. App. - 31 (KC) (October 31, 1995), the Election Officer stated:
The balance between protected speech and impermissible campaigning must be carefully struck. Restrictions on speech must not be read so broadly as to restrict the right and responsibility of union officers to conduct union business. Nor should the Rules prohibit opponents of those officers from criticizing those policies.
(Citations omitted).
In reviewing the statements attributed to Mr. Merrilees in this article, the Election Officer recognizes that as the IBT election draws near, the finer the line becomes for union entities, including the IBT Communications Department and local union officers, between legitimate issues of IBT policy and campaigning. Thus, it is extremely important that union staff persons or officials acting in their official capacity, on union time--be they from the IBT Communications Department or from a local union or joint council--make clear that they cannot respond to any inquiries about the election campaign, but only to policy issues. The Election Officer has, however, repeatedly stated that the IBT, and its Communications Department, may make known the IBT administration’s position on a variety of issues, regardless of whether those issues are also the subject of debate amongst the candidates. See Martin, et al., P-010-IBT-PNJ, et seq., (August 17, 1995) (decision on remand), aff’d, 95 - Elec. App. - 18 (KC) (October 2, 1995); Hoffa, P-733-IBT-SCE (May 1, 1996) (Union officer can communi-cate, advise and report to the membership on the Canadian sovereignty amendment); Hoffa, P-792-IBT-EOH (June 14, 1996) (appeal pending) (IBT Communications Department can produce information regarding financial condition of the union).
The Election Officer recognizes, however, that working journalists covering the IBT are not likely to divide their articles neatly between the policy debate and the campaign. Such distinctions may blur, even if the IBT or local union spokespersons have attempted to qualify their statements. Indeed, it is frequently the policy of reporters not to explain the “angle” of their story to those whom they are interviewing. Additionally, an article, once submitted by the reporter, may be substantially edited by others. The Election Officer rejects the suggestion that IBT staff and officials must not communicate with the press whenever there is the possibility that their making a statement about the union or its leaders will wind up being used
James P. Hoffa
June 20, 1996
Page 1
in a campaign context. Instead, the union must be free to communicate regarding its legitimate activities and defend itself from public criticism.
When the Election Officer identifies a statement made by an IBT official or staff person that appears to support or attack a candidate rather than union policies, she will conduct a specific inquiry as to the circumstances under which such a statement was attributed to the official or the staff person. In this case, the Election Officer finds that the sentences attributed to Mr. Merrilees which characterize Mr. Carey’s actions in regard to the union’s financial problems and collective bargaining pertain to issues of legitimate institutional interests in the IBT and do not violate the Rules. The references associated with these statements are to
Mr. Carey in his institutional capacity as general president of the union, not as a candidate for re-election.
In contrast, use of union resources to attack a candidate, such as the paraphrased statement attributed to Mr. Merrilees in the first paragraph cited by the protester, is not permitted by the Rules. Reference is explicitly made to Mr. DeSanti, and implicit reference is made to the International officer election. However, the Election Officer finds, based upon interviews with Mr. Merrilees and Mr. Klein, that Mr. Merrilees did not make the statements attributed to him in that portion of the article. Nor did Mr. Merrilees use the term “old guard” in referring to these opponents of the administration. The statement Mr. Merrilees did make in responding to accusations about IBT policies noted that such accusations often came from those IBT officials who oppose reform. Reporter Klein’s statement that the “corrupt pre-Carey era” reflected his view from what was being said “on the street” indicates that he used editorial license and other information in writing these protested lines, rather than
Mr. Merrilees’ actual statements.
Mr. Merrilees responded to inquiries in defense of IBT policies and the legitimate activities of the union such as its financial condition and the bargaining of national collective bargaining agreements. Thus, the final sentence cited by the protester, about Mr. Carey being the first leader in more than a decade to stand up to the trucking companies, is a direct quote of Mr. Merrilees. Mr. Carey is referred to by Mr. Merrilees as a “Teamster leader” and not as a candidate for International office. Given the discussion of Mr. Carey’s performance in negotiating these contracts that was apparently a topic of the interview, it is appropriate for Mr. Merrilees to respond about Mr. Carey’s performance as an International officer negotiating collective bargaining agreements. Thus, the Election Officer finds in the context presented, this reference is “addressed to regular functions, policies and activities of [an incumbent officer] . . . and not as [a] candidate [ ] for reelection.” See Martin, supra [quoting Donovan v. Metro. Dist. Council of Carpenters, 797 F.2d 140, 145 (3d Cir. 1986)].
In consideration of the foregoing, Mr. Hoffa’s 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
James P. Hoffa
June 20, 1996
Page 1
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