October 4, 1996
VIA UPS OVERNIGHT
Dane Passo
October 4, 1996
Page 1
Dane Passo
6811 W. Roosevelt Road
Berwyn, IL 60402
Ron Carey Campaign
c/o Nathaniel K. Charny
Cohen, Weiss & Simon
330 W. 42nd Street
New York, NY 10036
John Metz, Trustee
Teamsters Local Union 714
6815 W. Roosevelt Road
Berwyn, IL 60402
Dane Passo
October 4, 1996
Page 1
Re: Election Office Case No. P-920-LU714-CHI
DECISION ON REMAND
Gentlemen:
Dane Passo, a member of Local Union 705, 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 John Metz, trustee of Local Union 714. The protester contends that Mr. Metz violated the Rules by displaying campaign material supporting Ron Carey, IBT general president and a candidate for reelection, during working hours in a vehicle leased by the local union and now used by Mr. Metz or other persons on his staff.
On October 1, 1996, the Election Officer issued a decision denying the protest. In the decision, the Election Officer found that a credibility dispute existed as to who had placed the sunscreen supporting Mr. Carey in the leased union vehicle. The Election Officer concluded that the evidence did not support the assertion that Mr. Metz had placed the sunscreen in the vehicle and denied the protest. However, the Election Officer took steps to prevent a recurrence by directing Mr. Metz to park the vehicle “in a location which is not accessible and have the entry code on the vehicle changed.”
Dane Passo
October 4, 1996
Page 1
The appeal matter was heard before the Election Appeals Master on September 25, 1996. In a decision dated September 27, 1996, the matter was reversed and remanded to the Election Officer for imposition of a remedy.
Under Article XIV, Section 4 of the Rules, the Election Officer is empowered to “take whatever remedial action is appropriate.” In fashioning the appropriate remedy, the Election Officer views the seriousness of the violation, as well as its potential for interfering with the election process.
In determining an appropriate remedy, the Election Officer notes that the Rules generally restrict the use of union property for campaign purposes. Union-owned or leased cars are treated as an exception to this rule. Article VIII, Section 11(c) of the Rules reads, in relevant part:
Union officers and employees provided with Union-owned or leased cars, if otherwise afforded the right to utilize those cars for personal activities, may use the cars for campaign activities, provided no costs, or expenses incurred as a consequence, of such use are paid out of Union funds or other prohibited sources.
Pursuant to the rule, the Election Officer has permitted union officials and employees to use cars whose use is paid for by the union for campaign purposes, if such members are permitted to use the vehicle for their personal use. See In Re: Gregory, 91 - Elec. App. - 135 (SA) (April 29, 1991) (“Thus, given that Local-owned cars are used by Business Agents for personal reasons, it is not a violation of the Election Rules for a Business Agent to use his car to travel to a worksite to campaign.”); Blake, P-712-LU630-CLA (April 29, 1996), aff’d,
96 - Elec. App. - 185 (KC) (May 10,1996) (bumper sticker on personal vehicle used for union business and which the union reimburses for mileage and maintenance permitted).
Nonetheless, in the instant case, Mr. Metz did not claim to be using the car in question for campaign purposes, denying knowledge as to how the placard was placed in the vehicle. Hence, despite this exception, the use of this union property in Mr. Metz’s control for campaign purposes has been found to violate the Rules.
To ensure that other union property is not impermissibly used for campaign purposes, the Election Officer orders Mr. Metz to cease and desist from utilizing union property for campaign purposes and to instruct each of his subordinates accordingly.
Cars currently leased by the union for union employees, if permitted to be used for personal use, may be used for campaign purposes, in accordance with Article VIII,
Section 11(c) of the Rules.[1]
Dane Passo
October 4, 1996
Page 1
Within three (3) days of receipt of this order, Mr. Metz shall file an affidavit with the Election Officer detailing his compliance with this order.
An order of the Election Officer, unless otherwise stayed, takes immediate effect against a party found to be in violation of the Rules. In Re: Lopez, 96 - Elec. App. - 73 (KC) (February 13, 1996).
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
Julie E. Hamos, Regional Coordinator
[1]The original car with the “WTH” license plates at issue in this protest has been returned to the lessor. Other cars have been leased for local union use.