September 24, 1996
VIA UPS OVERNIGHT
James P. Hoffa
September 24, 1996
Page 1
James P. Hoffa
2593 Hounds Chase
Troy, MI 48098
Daniel Hornbeck, Vice President Legal
Yellow Freight Systems
10990 Roe Avenue
Overland Park, KS 66207
Bradley T. Raymond
Finkel, Whitefield, Selik, Raymond,
Ferrara & Feldman, P.C.
32300 Northwestern Highway, Suite 200
Farmington Hills, MI 48334
James P. Hoffa
September 24, 1996
Page 1
Re: Election Office Case No. P-975-YFS-SCE
Gentlemen:
A pre-election protest was filed pursuant to Article XIV, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”) by James P. Hoffa, a member of Local Union 614 and candidate for general president. Mr. Hoffa alleges that language appearing in a newsletter published by Yellow Freight Systems (“YFS”) constitutes an employer contribution to the campaign of Ron Carey, candidate for re-election as general president, in violation of the Rules.
Regional Coordinator Bruce Boyens investigated the protest.
To support his protest, Mr. Hoffa submitted an excerpt from the September 13, 1996 issue of YFS Week, a weekly publication financed by YFS and distributed to YFS employees. The excerpt appears below the headline “Hogan Steps Aside” and reads:
CHICAGO - James P. Hoffa, Teamsters presidential candidate, has lost a running-mate, William Hogan, Jr.
James P. Hoffa
September 24, 1996
Page 1
It was not easy for him to drop off the Hoffa ticket, Hogan said, but it gives Hoffa a better chance to take the union back for its members.
Hogan was ousted recently from leading a huge Chicago Teamsters local. Current national Teamsters union president
Ron Carey put Local 714 into trusteeship and accused Hogan and other officers of nepotism and corruption. Hogan said it was all political.
The race for president is hot. The election is in November, with results to be told in December. Carey has a record since 1991 of putting locals in temporary trusteeships, suspending local officers and selling corporate jets. Hoffa says Carey must be stopped before he destroys the union.
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 contribution 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 Rules also define campaign contributions to include discounts in the price or cost of goods. Rules, Definitions, 5(c). The term “employer” is defined under the Rules to include “any individual, corporation, trust, organization or other entity that employs another, paying monetary or other compensation in exchange for that individual’s services.” Rules, Definitions, 17.
In-house communications published by employers are subject to review under
Article XII, Section 1(b)(1) of the Rules in order to determine whether their “purpose, object or foreseeable effect” is to influence the election of a candidate. See Hoffa, P-743-
IBT-SCE (May 23, 1996). These publications are targeted to a limited audience (e.g., employees of a corporation). Such publications have no subscribers. Thus, they are not “media” communications, but rather public relations communications for employees or clients. The Election Officer has found that such publications do violate the Rules when they print material that supports or attacks a candidate for IBT office. See Barmon, P-469-LU769-SEC (March 1, 1991) (company newsletter); Committee to Elect Ron Carey, P-291A-LU70 and
P-278-CSF (March 14, 1991), aff’d, 91 - Elec. App.- 106 (SA) (March 22, 1991) (pension fund newsletter); and Masters, P-096-LU348-CLE (September 13, 1995), aff’d, 95 - Elec. App. - 26 (KC) (October 13, 1995) (union lawyer newsletter).
James P. Hoffa
September 24, 1996
Page 1
It is the determination of the Election Officer, however, that the protested portion of the employer publication does not support or attack the candidacy of any candidate. The excerpt is an account of the circumstances which led to William Hogan’s withdrawal from the International officer race. No candidate is endorsed in the piece and the views of Messrs. Hoffa, Hogan and Carey are reported. Such neutral reporting does not rise to the level of a prohibited employer contribution in support of either Mr. Carey or Mr. Hoffa.
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:
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
Bruce Boyens, Regional Coordinator