Protest Decisions

September 11, 1996

VIA UPS OVERNIGHT

James P. Hoffa

September 11, 1996

Page 1

James P. Hoffa

2593 Hounds Chase

Troy, MI 48098

Michael Belzer

Cornell School of Industrial

  and Labor Relations

Ives Hall

Ithaca, NY 14853

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

September 11, 1996

Page 1

Re: Election Office Case No. P-880-IBT-MGN

Gentlemen:

James P. Hoffa, a candidate for general president, filed a pre-election protest pursuant to Article XIV, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”) against Ron Carey, IBT general president and a candidate for re-election, the Cornell School of Industrial and Labor Relations and Michael Belzer, an employee of Cornell University.  The protester contends that quoted material attributed to Mr. Belzer in the

August 16, 1996 edition of the Tacoma News Tribune of Tacoma, Washington represents an improper employer contribution by Cornell University to Mr. Carey.  In addition, the protester contends that Mr. Belzer made such comments in “dozens of other media outlets,” has received lucrative contracts from the IBT and as a “guest” of the IBT at the Convention, spent hours “spinning” the media in favor of Mr. Carey and against the candidacy of

Mr. Hoffa.

James P. Hoffa

September 11, 1996

Page 1

The IBT responds that the protest insofar as it relates to Mr. Belzer’s conduct at the Convention is untimely since it is raised more than a month after the protester must have been aware of such activity.  Moreover, the IBT argues Mr. Belzer’s conduct did not constitute campaigning.  As to the comments made by Mr. Belzer in The News Tribune, the IBT states these comments are protected under the “media exception” for non-union financed news publications and that neither the article as a whole nor the comments of Mr. Belzer constitute campaigning in violation of the Rules.  Finally the IBT contends that it did not pay Mr. Belzer’s time or expenses at the Convention, nor has it awarded him any lucrative contracts.

This protest was investigated by Regional Coordinator William A. Wertheimer, Jr.

Mr. Hoffa alleges that Cornell University paid for Mr. Belzer to travel to Philadelphia and campaign for Mr. Carey at the IBT Convention.  The protester states that Richard Leebove, a Hoffa campaign aide, “observed Belzer providing interviews to journalists” at the Convention.  Mr. Hoffa claims that, after the Convention, the results of these interviews and other comments by Mr. Belzer appeared in various news publications.  Mr. Hoffa provided copies of an article excerpted from the July 21, 1996 issue of the Philadelphia Inquirer (“Inquirer”) and one from the August 16, 1996 issue of the Tacoma News Tribune (“News Tribune”) in which Mr. Belzer is quoted.

The Inquirer contained the following passage:

Although Carey’s support has grown among the delegates since [the last IBT Convention], the union leadership as reflected in the delegates to this year’s convention still includes many from the old guard of the Teamsters, a group that has relied on autocratic governing, nepotism, and, in some instances, corruption, said Michael Belzer, a labor researcher at Cornell University.

“I think the convention is only the convention of the leadership.”  he said.  “The contest will be in the fall.”

The News Tribune contained the following passage which was substantially similar to a passage in the Inquirer:

Michael Belzer, a labor researcher at Cornell University, said the Teamsters Union still suffers from the image of Hoffa’s father, James R. Hoffa, and other former leaders such as Jackie Presser.

The elder Jimmy Hoffa was sent to prison for jury tampering, then pardoned by President Nixon.  He disappeared -- presumably the victim of a Mafia contract -- in 1975.  Presser, a former union president, died while under indictment for corrupt union practices.

“The Teamsters Union and the whole AFL-CIO need to look outward,” said Belzer, to attract new members and broaden

James P. Hoffa

September 11, 1996

Page 1

support among the public.  Under Carey, he said, the Teamsters have done that.

“If the Teamsters had been like they had been before, with the Jackie Presser types in charge, there’s not a chance this would have happened.”

Article XII, Sections 1(a) and 1(b)(1) of the Rules prohibit an employer from making any campaign contributions to the campaign of a candidate for delegate or International office.  The Rules define “campaign contributions” to include “any direct or indirect contribution of money or other thing of value where the purpose, object or foreseeable effect of that contribu-tion is to influence the election of a candidate.”  Rules, Definitions, 5.  As stated in the Election Officer’s Advisory on Campaign Contributions and Disclosure, such contributions can include any goods, compensated services or any material things of value.  The term “employer” is defined under the Rules to include “any individual, corporation, trust, organiza-tion or other entity that employs another, paying monetary or other compensation in exchange for that individual’s services.”  Rules, Definitions, 17.

Mr. Hoffa alleges that statements made by Mr. Belzer to journalists constitute support for Mr. Carey’s candidacy.  Because these statements only appeared when the articles were published, the Election Officer considers this to be a timely protest, filed on the same day as the August 16, 1996 News Tribune article was published.

The protester asserts that the comments of this labor academic constitute a prohibited employer contribution.  The Election Officer has articulated a specific exception to this rule, however, in the case of the media.  The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution requires that news publications be entitled to the greatest latitude in exercising the right to commu-nicate.  Austin v. Michigan State Chamber of Commerce, 494 U.S. 652 (1990).  For this reason, publications and communications by a “media” employer constitute an exception to prohibited “employer” contributions.  Articles contained in these publications do not violate the Rules unless candidates or committees acting on behalf of candidates control the editorial policies of the responsible entities.  The “media employer” exception has been comprehen-sively discussed in several prior cases and is well-established.  See, e.g., Hoffa, P-743-IBT-SCE (May 23, 1996).

  Labor academics are often sought out for their opinions by members of the media who wish to incorporate scholarly analysis and historical background into their reporting of labor issues.  The commentary of these academics is a valuable resource to the media, and access to these individuals enhances the media’s ability to produce insightful, informed journalism.

James P. Hoffa

September 11, 1996

Page 1

Mr. Belzer had a legitimate reason to attend the Convention unrelated to any candidate’s campaign and Cornell University paid for him to attend.  The IBT Convention was a significant event in the history of American labor.  As a labor researcher, Mr. Belzer had a great deal of academic interest in what occurred there.  As a result, he was present at the Convention in order to better observe and record the proceedings.  The Convention was also a highly newsworthy event and drew media representatives from around the country.  At such an event, it is natural for journalists to solicit opinions from the academic observers present.

              In the present case, Mr. Belzer provided the media with opinions and observations he has made as a university labor researcher.  The Election Officer will not interfere with the ability of the media to accomplish its journalistic mission nor with the ability of a labor academic to perform the functions of his profession.  Such quotations of labor academics, political figures or others which appear in the media stories are protected by the media exception.

The protest raises an additional issue of whether Mr. Belzer--while paid by Cornell University--provided the Carey campaign with promotional or media services by “spinning”

the media in favor of Mr. Carey and against the candidacy of Mr. Hoffa.  Because the protester perceives Mr. Belzer’s comments to support Mr. Carey’s candidacy, he argues, in essence, that Mr. Belzer’s actions are analogous to a media relations agent who is paid to manipulate the media to benefit his client.  In this case, asserts the protester, such services were paid by an employer, Cornell University.

Other than what the protestor contends to be statements supportive of Mr. Carey that appeared in media articles, there is no evidence that Mr. Belzer has served as a media relations agent to the Carey campaign.  Nor did the investigation disclose any evidence to support the protester’s claim that the IBT administration was giving Mr. Belzer “lucrative contracts.”[1] 

Accordingly, the 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:

James P. Hoffa

September 11, 1996

Page 1

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, D.C. 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

William A. Wertheimer, Jr., Regional Coordinator