January 8, 1999
VIA FIRST-CLASS MAIL
Julian Fleurs
January 8, 1999
Page 1
Julian Fleurs
57-2115 Erinbrooke Crescent
Ottawa, ON K1B 4H6
CANADA
André Papineau, President
Teamsters Local Union 91
1300 Ages Drive
Ottawa, ON K1G 5T4
CANADA
Ron Douglas
Teamsters Canada
#204-1867 W. Broadway
Vancouver, BC V6J 4W1
CANADA
James P. Hoffa
2593 Hounds Chase
Troy, MI 48098
Hoffa Slate
c/o Patrick J. Szymanski, Esq.
Baptiste & Wilder
1150 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 500
Washington, DC 20036
Bradley T. Raymond, Esq.
Finkel, Whitefield, Selik,
Raymond, Ferrara & Feldman
32300 Northwestern Highway, Suite 200
Farmington Hills, MI 48334
Julian Fleurs
January 8, 1999
Page 1
Re: Election Office Case No. Post-66-EOH
Gentlemen:
Julian Fleurs, a member of Local Union 91, filed a post-election protest pursuant to Article XIV, Section 3(a) of the Rules for the 1995-1996 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”) against Election Officer Michael G. Cherkasky. Mr. Fleurs alleges that he, and possibly other members of Local Union 91, did not receive a ballot for the IBT International Officer Election.
The protest was investigated by Election Office Staff Attorney Peter F. Gimbrère.
Mr. Fleurs is employed at the RONA Warehouse in Napean, Ontario, Canada. In a letter to the Election Officer dated December 18, 1998, Mr. Fleurs alleges that while there was a proper posting of the Notice of Election at his workplace, neither he nor any of the other workers that he questioned ever received a ballot.
Julian Fleurs
January 8, 1999
Page 1
Article XIV, Section 3(a) states that the only protests that shall be considered postelection are those “regarding any alleged improper election day or postelection conduct or event.”
Mr. Fleurs current protest is consequently improper. He should have contacted the Election Office or filed a protest regarding his failure to receive a ballot prior to the beginning of the ballot count on December 3, 1998.
In preparing for this mail ballot election, the Election Officer recognized that, for a variety of reasons, some small fraction of members who were eligible to receive a ballot may not get one in the initial mailing. Because of this, the Election Office operated a toll-free telephone number for members to call if they had not received their ballot. The Election Officer’s investigation into this protest revealed that while Mr. Fleurs was aware of the existence of the toll-free telephone number, neither he nor any of his co-workers called in to request a ballot.
Accordingly, the protest is DENIED.
Any interested party not satisfied with this determination may request a hearing before the Election Appeals Master within three (3) days 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, 444 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 445, Washington, DC 20001, Facsimile (202) 624-3525. A copy of the protest must accompany the request for a hearing.
Sincerely,
Michael G. Cherkasky
Election Officer
cc: Kenneth Conboy, Election Appeals Master