September 24, 1996
VIA UPS OVERNIGHT
Robert Spearman
c/o The Stand Up Slate
10733 S. Western Avenue
Chicago, IL 60643
James Buck, Trustee
Teamsters Local Union 745
1007 Jonelle Street
Dallas, TX 75217
Re: Election Office Case No. P-973-LU745-SOU
Gentlemen:
Robert Spearman, candidate for vice president at-large for the Stand Up Slate, 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”) alleging that Local Union 745 intentionally sent the Stand Up Slate an inaccurate work-site list, which caused the slate to miss opportunities to campaign.
Local Union 745, which was recently placed in trusteeship, responds that the records were in disarray, because outgoing officers erased employer records from the computer’s data bank. It further responds that it supplied that Stand Up Slate with a list that it believed to be correct. It states that had the protester contacted the local union when he realized that the lists were inaccurate, the local union would have made additional efforts to locate a correct list.
Regional Coordinator Dolores C. Hall investigated this protest.
The Election Officer’s investigation revealed that Local Union 745 was placed in emergency trusteeship on August 22, 1996. When the trustee, James Buck, entered the local union, he found that many of the filing cabinets were locked and that he did not have keys to open them. He also found that many computer files had been erased from the system.
Robert Spearman
September 24, 1996
Page 1
Mr. Spearman requested the local union’s work-site list on September 7, 1996, pursuant to Article VIII, Section 1(b) of the Rules: “[e]ach delegate candidate, each alternate delegate candidate and each nominated or accredited International Officer candidate shall have the right to a current list of all sites, with corresponding addresses, where any and all Local Union members work.” The trustee’s assistant found a file folder labeled “Employer List,” which she copied and provided to Mr. Spearman on September 9, 1996.
Mr. Spearman attempted to use the list to campaign while in Texas. He discovered that the list was of employer offices, not work sites. Mr. Spearman did not attempt to contact the local union offices about the problem. Mr. Spearman states that his slate lost two days of campaigning due to the incorrect list. Thus, he argues his slate expended $1000 on their trip to Texas, where the list was inaccurate.
Mr. Spearman alleges that Local Union 745 intentionally sent him an incorrect list in order to discourage the Stand Up Slate from campaigning in its area. There is no evidence to support this allegation. The Election Officer finds that Local Union 745 attempted to comply with Mr. Spearman’s request but had difficulty doing so because of the state of the local union’s records.
During the investigation of this protest, it became apparent that an accurate work-site list for Local Union 745 no longer exists. Mr. Buck stated that they are reconstructing the local union’s records one piece at a time, and “it is a slow process.” In an effort to address the problem, the Regional Coordinator provided the protester and the trustee with a copy of the work-site list that Local Union 745 submitted in its Local Union Plan, pursuant to Article II, Section 4 of the Rules.
Mr. Spearman also alleges that the IBT should have kept an accurate list of Local
Union 745’s work sites and that the IBT should have provided the list to him. Under
Article VIII, Section 1(b), however, the obligation to keep and provide work-site lists rests on the local unions, not the IBT.
In light of the circumstances surrounding the emergency trusteeship of the local union, the disarray of its records, the fact that Mr. Spearman did not contact the local union when he found the list to be inaccurate, and the fact that he subsequently received a work-site list from the Regional Coordinator, the Election Officer finds that no further remedy is appropriate.
Under these circumstances, the Election Officer concludes that further processing of this protest is unwarranted. The protester’s complaint, as contained in this protest, has been addressed, and the relief requested has been achieved to the maximum extent feasible. Accordingly, the Election Officer finds that the protest is now RESOLVED.
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
Robert Spearman
September 24, 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
Dolores C. Hall, Regional Coordinator