Protest Decisions

              October 14, 1996

VIA UPS OVERNIGHT

Doreen Gasman

October 14, 1996

Page 1

Doreen Gasman

2517 N.E. 13th Court

Ft. Lauderdale, FL  33304

Steve Hick, President

Teamsters Local Union 283

1625 Fort Street

Wyandotte, MI  48192

Bill Sanfilipo, HR Manager

Heublein, Inc.

2500 Enterprise

Allen Park, MI  48101

Doreen Gasman

October 14, 1996

Page 1

Re:  Election Office Case No. P-966-LU283-MGN

Gentlepersons:

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

Doreen Gasman, an International union representative, against Heublein, Inc. (“Heublein”).   Ms. Gasman alleges that Heublein violated the Rules by prohibiting her and Steve Hicks, president of Local Union 283, from distributing campaign literature and speaking with employees on company property.

Regional Coordinator William A. Wertheimer, Jr. investigated the protest.

Doreen Gasman

October 14, 1996

Page 1

The facts are undisputed.  On September 12, 1996, Ms. Gasman and Mr. Hicks traveled to the Heublein plant in Allen Park, Michigan where approximately 250 members of Local Union 283 are employed.   Ms. Gasman and Mr. Hicks entered the company’s property through the front gate and began distributing literature concerning the International union  election to members who were exiting the plant and walking to the employee parking lots.[1]  Heublein Human Resources Manager Bill Sanfilipo came out of the building and ordered the protester and Mr. Hicks to leave the property.  Ms. Gasman states that she told Mr. Sanfilipo, who is new to his position, that in the last election cycle the Election Officer “ruled in the case of Heublein vs. Don Stone” that Heublein was to allow access to its property to IBT members for the purpose of campaigning, specifically at the main employee entrance.[2]  At that point, Mr. Sanfilipo called the police to remove Ms. Gasman and Mr. Hicks from the property. 

Ms. Gasman states that Heublein is “adjacent to a major highway,” and claims that “Mr. Sanfilipo knows well that the only way anyone can speak to a worker . . . is to be on the company’s property itself.”  (Emphasis in original.) 

Under the Rules, a non-employee may gain access to employer premises:  (1) under the “parking lot rule,” which creates a limited right for non-employees to campaign in parking lots where members park their cars;[3] and (2) onto other employer property if the employer has allowed access to non-employees in the past.[4]  See Thomas, P-922-LU347-CHI (September 30, 1996).

In this matter, Ms. Gasman claims a pre-existing right to access Heublein’s premises due to the decision by the Election Officer in the last election.  A review of Stone, however, shows that Heublein agreed to permit campaigning outside its main entrance in order to resolve that protest.  The negotiation that produced that resolution was conducted in a different legal framework with respect to non-employee access to employer premises than underlies the current Rules.  Accordingly, the Election Officer declines to recognize Heublein’s voluntary agreement as creating a pre-existing right to be enforced in this election cycle.

Doreen Gasman

October 14, 1996

Page 1

Thus, under the Rules, Ms. Gasman may only access Heublein’s premises under the parking lot access provisions set forth in Article VIII, Section 11(e).  These provisions create a limited right of access to IBT members and candidates to distribute literature and seek support for their campaign in any parking lot used by union members to park their vehicles in connection with their employment.  While “presumptively available,” this right is not without limitations.  It is not available to any employee on working time, and candidates and their supporters cannot solicit or campaign to employees who are on working time.  It is also restricted to campaigning that will not materially interfere with an employer’s normal business activities.

During discussions with the Regional Coordinator, however, Heublein declined to resolve this protest by permitting access to its parking lot.  In the absence of any offer to show why it should be granted relief from any part of the parking lot access rules, the Election Officer will order compliance.

Accordingly, the protest is DENIED as to access to the area outside Heublein’s main entrance and GRANTED as to access to Heublein’s parking lot.

When the Election Officer determines that “any . . . conduct has occurred which may prevent . . . a fair, honest, open and informed election, the Election Officer may take whatever remedial action is appropriate.”  Article XIV, Section 4.  In fashioning the appropriate remedy, the Election Officer views the nature and seriousness of the violation, as well as its potential for interfering with the election process. 

The Election Officer orders Heublein, Inc. to permit campaigning in parking lots where IBT members park their personal vehicles, in conformity with Article VIII, Section 11(e) of the Rules, subject only to the limitations set forth in that section.  Within two (2) days of the date of this decision, Heublein shall submit an affidavit to the Election Officer in which it acknowledges its compliance with this decision.

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

Doreen Gasman

October 14, 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

William A. Wertheimer, Jr., Regional Coordinator