October 31, 1996
VIA UPS OVERNIGHT
Michael DeRossett
October 31, 1996
Page 1
Michael DeRossett
1210 Aransas Drive
Euless, TX 76039
Ron Carey, General President
International Brotherhood of Teamsters
25 Louisiana Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20001
Ron Carey Campaign
c/o Nathaniel K. Charny
Cohen, Weiss & Simon
330 W. 42nd Street
New York, NY 10036
Dennis Skelton, Vice President
International Brotherhood of Teamsters
25 Louisiana Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20001
John Sullivan, Associate General Counsel
International Brotherhood of Teamsters
25 Louisiana Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20001
Bradley T. Raymond
Finkel, Whitefield, Selik, Raymond,
Ferrara & Feldman, P.C.
32300 Northwestern Highway, Suite 200
Farmington Hills, MI 48334
Michael DeRossett
October 31, 1996
Page 1
Re: Election Office Case Nos. P-1141-IBT-EOH
P-1145-IBT-EOH
Gentlemen:
Related pre-election protests were filed pursuant to Article XIV, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the 1995-1996 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”) by Michael DeRossett, a member of Local Union 745. In P-1141-IBT-EOH, Mr. DeRossett alleges that the material supporting the candidacies of Ron Carey, IBT general president and a candidate for reelection, and Dennis Skelton, director of the IBT’s National Freight Division and a candidate for reelection as vice president for the Central Region on the Ron Carey No Corruption-No Dues Increase Slate (“Carey slate”), appeared in the union-financed publication Teamsters Freight Dock Safety and Health Manual (“the manual”), in violation of the Rules. In P-1145-IBT-EOH, the protester makes the same allegations concerning the manual and
Michael DeRossett
October 31, 1996
Page 1
Mr. Skelton’s letter and alleges that a voting guide issued by DRIVE also contains material supporting the candidacy of Mr. Carey.[1]
Specifically, the protester points to the first page of the publication. The protester states that this page contains an introductory letter by Mr. Carey in which Mr. Carey states, “There is nothing more important to your family than making sure that you come home from work each day in one piece.” The letter ends with the words “Sincerely, Ron Carey, General President.” Mr. DeRossett states that this letter constitutes “more name recognition, campaigning or electioneering at the expense of members’ dues money.” In addition,
Mr. DeRossett contends that a “long letter,” written by Mr. Skelton and accompanying the manual, constitutes campaigning, in violation of the Rules.
In the DRIVE literature, Mr. DeRossett contends that statements of Mr. Carey reproduced in the communication and an accompanying photograph of Mr. Carey constitutes “a nice 6X8 advertisement at the expense of DRIVE [sic].”
Regional Coordinator Dolores C. Hall investigated the protest.
Article VIII, Section 8(a) of the Rules states that a union-financed publication or communication may not be “used to support or attack any candidate or the candidacy of any person.” In reviewing union-financed communications for improper campaign content, the Election Officer looks to the tone, content and timing of the publication. Martin, P-010-
IBT-PNJ et al. (August 17, 1995) (decision on remand), aff’d, 95 - Elec. App. - 18 (KC) (October 2, 1995). The Election Officer also considers the context in which the communication appeared.
In Martin, the Election Officer recognized that union officers and officials have a “right and responsibility to exercise the powers of their office and to advise and report to the membership on issues of general concern” (quoting Camarata v. International Bhd. of Teamsters, 478 F. Supp. 321, 330 (D.D.C. 1979), aff’d, 108 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2924 (D.C. Cir. 1981)). The Election Officer also recognized in Martin that:
[a]n otherwise acceptable communication may be considered campaigning if it goes on to make a connection with the election or election process, if it involves excessive direct or indirect personal attacks on candidates, or, alternatively, involves lavish praise of candidates. Otherwise, legitimate coverage of the activities of a union official running for office may constitute campaigning if it is excessive.
Michael DeRossett
October 31, 1996
Page 1
An examination of the protested letter, manual and DRIVE flyer reveal no tone or content laudatory of either Messrs. Carey or Skelton. Nor does the protested language criticize or attack the candidacy of any other individual or slate. The letter printed in the publication and the letter from Mr. Skelton accompanying the manual were both produced as a result of the execution of the duties of office of both Messrs. Carey and Skelton. Likewise, the comments in the DRIVE flyer are those of the IBT general president to members concerning the upcoming national legislative elections. The protester does not allege that the content of these communications is campaigning per se. Rather, he implies that the distribution of these communications to the membership just prior to the mailing of ballots constitutes unnecessary, excessive coverage intended to further the candidacies of Messrs. Carey and Skelton.
In Hoffa, P-1053-LU952-CLA, P-1088-LU952-CLA (October 28, 1996), the Election Officer determined coverage of a candidate’s fulfillment of his duties as a local union officer was excessive. In that case, the candidate’s name appeared 32 times in a
24-page publication, he appeared in over 10 percent of the photographs in the issue, and significant descriptions of his career and positions appeared in several places. In that case, the Election Officer determined that the coverage received by the candidate was “largely gratuitous” in that “it praised his experience and his general role in the affairs of the local union.”
In the communications relevant to the present protest, however, no such praise, or repetitive or gratuitous coverage, appears. The letters and the statement in the DRIVE literature are less than one page each. Mr. Skelton’s letter urges freight stewards to complete the checklist in the manual and return it to the Teamsters Safety and Health Department. In his letter in the manual, Mr. Carey describes the manual as a “tool to help” members make companies respect their rights. He describes the utility of the manual and asks members to study the manual to make sure their workplaces are in compliance with the rules in it. In the DRIVE flyer, Mr. Carey attacks the voting record of members of the 104th Congress, urges members to vote for candidates that support issues important to working families, and exhorts members to work on campaigns, register and vote.
Nothing in these communications amounts to excessive coverage or excessive mention of a candidate’s name or qualifications. The protester contends that the timing of the issuance of these communications was intended to provide an advantage to the Carey campaign. While the protester’s assertion that union communications should be more stringently analyzed for campaign support and impact as the election draws near is correct, the production and transmission of the protested communications, even under this higher standard, does not violate the Rules. Union officers must still fulfill their duties, even in the sensitive period just prior to the election. So long as these communications do not contain a reference to the campaign or excessive reference to a candidate, the communication does not violate the Rules.
Accordingly, the protest is DENIED.
Michael DeRossett
October 31, 1996
Page 1
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
Dolores C. Hall, Regional Coordinator
[1]DRIVE stands for Democrat, Republican, Independent Voter Education and is the political action committee of the IBT.