August 27, 1996
VIA UPS OVERNIGHT
James P. Hoffa
August 27, 1996
Page 1
James P. Hoffa
2593 Hounds Chase
Troy, MI 48098
Brian Clinkenbeard
Roadway Express
Terminal 434
3240 Franklin Limestone Road
Antioch, TN 37013
Thomas Allen
Roadway Express
Terminal 434
3240 Franklin Limestone Road
Antioch, TN 37013
Human Resources Department
Roadway Express
Terminal 434
3240 Franklin Limestone Road
Antioch, TN 37013
Tim Aldred
2616 Ellington Circle
Nashville, TN 37211
William R. Copeland, President
Teamsters Local Union 519
2306 Montclair Avenue
Knoxville, TN 37917
Bradley T. Raymond
Finkel, Whitefield, Selik, Raymond,
Ferrara & Feldman
32300 Northwestern Highway, Suite 200
Farmington Hills, MI 48334
James P. Hoffa
August 27, 1996
Page 1
Re: Election Office Case No. P-873-LU480-SCE
Gentlemen:
James P. Hoffa
August 27, 1996
Page 1
James P. Hoffa, candidate for general president, 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”) against Roadway Express, Inc. (“Roadway” or “the employer”). The protester alleges that Brian Clinkenbeard and Tim Allen, Roadway supervisors, violated the Rules by threatening Tim Aldred, a member of Local Union 480, on or about August 8, 1996 because of his activities in support of Mr. Hoffa’s candidacy.
Roadway denies threatening Mr. Aldred. The employer states that it is concerned about the productivity of the shift on which Mr. Aldred worked and has communicated that concern to the workers on the shift.
Regional Coordinator Bruce Boyens investigated the protest.
Mr. Aldred is the campaign manager for Mr. Hoffa in the Nashville, Tennessee area. He worked on a shift that began on August 7 and ended August 8, 1996. Mr. Aldred estimated that on that shift, about 48 of the approximately 60 employees wore Hoffa shirts, buttons, hats, etc. The employer states that production is lower on Mr. Aldred’s shift than on the other shifts, resulting in the issuance of about 30 suspensions and/or warning letters to employees on that shift.
Mr. Aldred alleges that while on the shift beginning August 7, he told his supervisor, Mr. Clinkenbeard, that “the reason you’re bird-dogging us is because we want Hoffa.”
Mr. Aldred alleges that Mr. Clinkenbeard responded by telling Mr. Aldred that he should “get off the Hoffa kick” and “you’re messing up our operation here.” When Mr. Aldred asked Mr. Clinkenbeard what he meant by the latter comment, the supervisor replied that employees were not producing enough. Mr. Aldred alleges that Mr. Clinkenbeard also told him, “We have ways of getting rid of people like you” and “If you’d been from up there,” referring to the north where the supervisor had worked at another Roadway terminal, “you’d be gone.” Mr. Aldred believes that these comments refer to his support of Mr. Hoffa and not his lack of productivity. Mr. Aldred also alleges that another supervisor, Mr. Allen, has said to him, “I’m tired of that Hoffa shit.”
Both Mr. Clinkenbeard and Mr. Allen deny making the statements attributed to them by Mr. Aldred. Mr. Clinkenbeard admits that he has made several statements to Mr. Aldred about his lack of production. Mr. Clinkenbeard asserts that he does not care who wins the International officer election. Mr. Aldred admits that Mr. Clinkenbeard has continually been after the employees on his shift about their lack of production and has continually “bird-dogged” them. Mr. Clinkenbeard asserts that he has been after the employees about production, noting that production is lower on Mr. Aldred’s shift compared to other Roadway shifts and terminals.
Herbert Bolin, a witness offered by Mr. Aldred, states that after Mr. Aldred made the Hoffa statement, he overheard Mr. Clinkenbeard state to Mr. Aldred, “You need to get off that kick.” Mr. Bolin states that he did not hear Mr. Clinkenbeard make any statement about Mr. Hoffa or the threats attributed by Mr. Aldred to Mr. Clinkenbeard. Mr. Bolin confirms that Mr. Clinkenbeard is continually watching and reprimanding employees on this shift for lack of production.
James P. Hoffa
August 27, 1996
Page 1
The Rules at Article VIII, Section 11(f) prohibit retaliation and the threat of retaliation by any person against a member for exercising any right guaranteed therein. To demonstrate retaliation, a protester must show that conduct protected by the Rules was a motivating factor in the adverse decision or conduct in dispute. The Election Officer will not find retaliation if she concludes that the charged party would have taken the same action even in the absence of the protester’s protected conduct. See Wsol, P-095-IBT-CHI (September 20, 1995), aff’d,
95 - Elec. App. - 17 (KC) (October 10, 1995).
Based upon the investigation, the Election Officer finds that while Mr. Clinkenbeard may have stated to Mr. Aldred to “get off that kick” after Mr. Aldred indicated his support of Mr. Hoffa, Mr. Clinkenbeard did not threaten Mr. Aldred’s job. There is no corroboration for the statement alleged to have been made by Mr. Allen regarding Mr. Hoffa.
There is little question that the supervisors, and particularly Mr. Clinkenbeard, have been cracking down on the productivity during Mr. Aldred’s shift. In the context of the effort of Roadway to encourage more productivity from its employees, the thrust of the comment to “get off this kick” is reasonably interpreted as discouraging the employees from any slackening or diversion from work. The Election Officer, therefore, does not find that the Roadway supervisors threatened employees because of their support for Mr. Hoffa.
Accordingly, the allegation of threats of retaliation is DENIED.
The protester also alleged that the employer had denied access to a candidate for International vice president who sought to campaign on the employer’s parking lot. Subsequently, the protester advised that he wished to withdraw the allegation on access. The Election Officer, finding that the requested withdrawal effectuates the purposes of the Rules, permits this allegation of the protest pertaining to access to be WITHDRAWN.
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
James P. Hoffa
August 27, 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
Bruce Boyens, Regional Coordinator