October 11, 1996
VIA UPS OVERNIGHT
Bob Blanchet & Leo Hobson
October 11, 1996
Page 1
Bob Blanchet
3853 Dryden Road
Fremont, CA 94555
Leo Hobson
1562 S. Vaneventer Avenue
St. Louis, MO 63110
Ron Carey Campaign
c/o Nathaniel K. Charny
Cohen, Weiss & Simon
330 W. 42nd Street
New York, NY 10036
James P. Hoffa
2593 Hounds Chase
Troy, MI 48098
John Souza, Secretary-Treasurer
Teamsters Local Union 386
1225 13th Street
Modesto, CA 95354
Bradley T. Raymond
Finkel, Whitefield, Selik, Raymond,
Ferrara & Feldman, P.C.
32300 Northwestern Highway, Suite 200
Farmington Hills, MI 48334
Bob Blanchet & Leo Hobson
October 11, 1996
Page 1
Re: Election Office Case No. P-989-LU386-CSF
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 Bob Blanchet, a member of Local Union 287, and Leo Hobson, a member of Local Union 600. The protesters allege that literature supporting the candidacy of the slate of James P. Hoffa, a member of Local Union 614 and a candidate for general president, was displayed for distribution on the premises of Local Union 386 without a similar opportunity provided to other candidates, in violation of the Rules.
Bob Blanchet & Leo Hobson
October 11, 1996
Page 1
Specifically, the protesters contend that they observed a stack of flyers in public view at the offices of Local Union 386. According to the protesters, the text of these flyers stated, “James P. Hoffa supports our Teamsters DRIVE program to get out the vote in ‘96 . . . bring your family and Hoffa ‘96 colors to the rally and join with many other Hoffa supporters to help get out the vote in 1996 . . .”
Mr. Hoffa does not deny that copies of the flyer were present at the local union. Rather, he responds that the protested flyer does not constitute campaigning as defined by the Rules, but merely states his support for the IBT’s drive to register members to vote. He states that the Election Officer should not punish him or the local union for his public expression of support for the registration drive. In addition, Mr. Hoffa states that, even if the flyers do amount to campaigning as defined by the Rules, the presence of the flyers at the local union does not automatically violate the Rules unless it is demonstrated that other candidates were prevented from distributing their literature at the local union.
Local Union 386 responds that it did not consider the flyer to be campaigning when copies of it were placed on the counter in the lobby of the local union’s offices. According to the local union, copies of a different flyer advertising the rally and mentioning Mr. Carey were placed in the lobby at the IBT’s request on September 16, 1996. The protested flyers were placed in the lobby on September 17, 1996. The local union did not remove them because they were considered to be valid advertisements of the event similar to the IBT flyer.
Regional Coordinator Matthew D. Ross investigated the protest.
Article VIII, Section 5(a)(4) of the Rules states as follows:
A Local Union shall not discriminate or permit discrimination in favor or against any candidate in conjunction with its meetings or otherwise. This requirement shall apply not only to formal presentations by or on behalf of candidates but also to informal campaign activities, such as . . . literature distribution tables, etc.
Prior to determining whether the presence of materials for distribution amounts to discriminatory access in violation of the Rules, the Election Officer must first examine whether or not the protested literature constitutes “campaigning.” Campaigning has been defined by the Election Officer as “advocacy for or against a candidate.” Giacumbo et al.,
P-001-IBT-PNJ et seq. (September 29, 1995), aff’d in relevant part, 95 - Elec. App. - 32 (KC) (November 1, 1995); See also Caffrey, P-047-JC16-NYC (October 19, 1995).
The text of the protested flyer is as follows:
TEAMSTERS
VOTER REGISTRATION
DRIVE
James Hoffa
Supports our TEAMSTER DRIVE program to get out the vote in 1996!
REGISTER TO VOTE! at the Teamster Family Rally on
Bob Blanchet & Leo Hobson
October 11, 1996
Page 1
[date, time, and place]
Bring your family and HOFFA ‘96 colors to the Rally and join with many other HOFFA supporters to help GET OUT THE VOTE IN 1996
In a box under the main text appear the words, “HOFFA CENTRAL VALLEY ELECTION COMMITTEE” and the members of the committee are identified.
The investigation revealed that these flyers were placed on a counter in the lobby of the local union’s offices. The flyers remained on the counter for at least five days.
Mr. Hoffa contends that this flyer does not constitute campaigning but merely expresses his support for the voter registration program. In the flyer, however, his own Central Valley Election Committee, a body whose purpose is to further the interests of the Hoffa campaign, exhorts supporters of Mr. Hoffa’s candidacy to participate in the registration program and to attend the IBT voter rally in Modesto where they are to wear their “Hoffa ‘96 colors” and join with other IBT members who also support the candidacy of Mr. Hoffa. The numerous implicit references to Mr. Hoffa’s candidacy and a request that attending individuals display insignia indicating their support for that candidacy renders meritless Mr. Hoffa’s contention that the literature does not reference the International officer election. The literature supports Mr. Hoffa’s candidacy and is, therefore, campaigning, as defined by the Rules.
The local union contends that the protested flyer was similar in nature to an IBT flyer advertising the voter registration rally that mentions Mr. Carey and was not, thus, campaigning. The two documents are, however, distinguishable. The IBT flyer mentions
Mr. Carey, but in no way references his campaign or identifies him as a candidate. The flyer does not urge rally attendees to display their support for any candidate, nor does it mention that supporters of a particular candidate will congregate at the event. As the Election Officer has previously held concerning substantially identical flyers, “None of the activities listed
on the protested flyer constitute ‘advocacy for or against a candidate’ in the International officer election. The advertised event is a voter registration picnic related to the U.S. presidential election, which does not inherently violate the Rules.” Hoffa, P-996-LU436-CLE (September 23, 1996), citing Hoffa, P-925-IBT-MGN (September 20, 1996). Mr. Hoffa’s flyer, on the other hand, clearly references his campaign and urges his supporters to attend the rally in their Hoffa colors.
Mr. Hoffa argues that, even if the literature were campaigning, its presence at the local union does not automatically violate the Rules. Local unions are free to establish policies that allow or restrict the distribution of campaign material inside local union facilities so long as such policies treat candidates in a non-discriminatory fashion.
Bob Blanchet & Leo Hobson
October 11, 1996
Page 1
In a communication dated October 9, 1996, Local Union 386 states that at the time the Hoffa flyer was placed in the lobby of the local union’s offices the local union had not established a policy regarding the distribution of campaign material on its premises. A new policy, however, has been implemented to prohibit the placing of any literature in the lobby for distribution. While the local union is free to establish such a policy, the fact remains unaltered that the Hoffa campaign derived a benefit from having its material present in the local union’s lobby for five days, especially since the local union has now closed the door on further displays of campaign literature. See, e.g., Ross, P-466-LU104-RMT (March 12, 1996) (pro-slate business cards on counter of local union hall discriminated in favor of the slate, in violation of the Rules).
Accordingly, the protest is GRANTED.
When the Election Officer determines that the Rules have been violated, she “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 the following:
1. Within three (3) days of the receipt of this protest, Local Union 386 will send, via facsimile and first-class mail, an invitation to the Ron Carey No Corruption-No Dues Increase Slate and the Stand Up for Teamsters slate to send to the local union campaign material to be placed on the counter in the lobby of the local union’s offices.
2. Both slates may submit up to fifty (50) copies of the campaign material that shall be no larger than 8½11 inches and no longer than one side of one page.
3. Upon receipt of this literature, the local union will place all copies received on the counter in the lobby of the local union where the Hoffa material was placed. Access to the material will not be obstructed in any way. The literature will remain on the counter for five (5) business days.
4. Within two (2) days of the issuance of invitations to the slates, the local union will submit an affidavit to the Election Officer in which it acknowledges 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:
Bob Blanchet & Leo Hobson
October 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
Matthew D. Ross, Regional Coordinator