September 16, 1998
VIA FIRST-CLASS MAIL
James P. Hoffa
Hoffa Slate
September 16, 1998
Page 1
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
Tom Leedham
c/o Tom Leedham Campaign Office
Post Office Box 15877
Washington, DC 20003
John Hess, Co-Editor
Jump Cut, A Review of
Contemporary Media
405 E Street, NE
Washington, DC 20002
Gail Sullivan
405 E Street, NE
Washington, DC 20002
Michael Eisenscher
c/o John Hess, Co-Editor
Jump Cut, A Review of
Contemporary Media
405 E Street, NE
Washington, DC 20002
Bradley T. Raymond, Esq.
Finkel, Whitefield, Selike,
Raymond, Ferrara & Feldman
32300 Northwestern Highway
Suite 200
Farmington Hills, MI 48334
James P. Hoffa
Hoffa Slate
September 16, 1998
Page 1
Re: Election Office Case No. PR-166-TLC-EOH
Decision on Remand
Gentlepersons:
James P. Hoffa, a candidate for general president, and the Hoffa Unity Slate filed a pre-election protest pursuant to Article XIV, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the 1995-1996 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”) against Tom Leedham, a candidate for general president, John Hess, the spouse of IBT member Gail Sullivan, and
James P. Hoffa
Hoffa Slate
September 16, 1998
Page 1
Michael Eisenscher, alleging an improper solicitation. On July 22, 1998, the Election Officer issued a decision finding that Mr. Hess properly solicited contributions for Mr. Leedham’s legal and accounting fund. The Election Officer also found a violation of the Rules in Mr. Eisenscher’s transmittal of Mr. Hess’s solicitation to other individuals through electronic mail. In the decision, the Election Officer stated that neither it nor Mr. Leedham had contact with Mr. Eisenscher, and, because no one knew whether Mr. Eisenscher was an employer or not, the Election Officer found a violation.
Mr. Leedham requested a hearing before the Election Appeals Master, which was conducted on August 3, 1998. On August 5, 1998, Mr. Leedham submitted a letter stating that he finally made contact with Mr. Eisenscher and that he is an employee, not an employer. On August 6, 1998, the Election Appeals Master remanded the protest to the Election Officer for investigation of the new evidence.
The investigation disclosed that Mr. Eisenscher is an employee of a non-profit organization, the Organize Training Center. He is Coordinator of the Project for Labor Renewal; however, he works alone on the Project, supervises no employees, and is supervised by the Center’s Executive Director Mike Miller. Mr. Eisenscher is not a member of the IBT nor is any member of his immediate family a member of the IBT.
Mr. Eisenscher, who works with IBT local unions across the political spectrum, stated he had not intended to solicit contributions or to choose sides. Mr. Eisenscher regularly collects news items regarding labor issues from the Internet, collates them and sends them to numerous people via the Internet. He saw Mr. Hess’s letter as a newsworthy item and passed it along as he did other information.
Under the Advisory on Campaign Contributions and Disclosure (“Advisory”), “[a]n individual, group of individuals, or entity’s agreement to permit their name to be used in a fundraising solicitation constitutes a campaign contribution under the Rules. The use of the individual or entity’s name in connection with a candidate or campaign’s fundraising efforts is a material thing of value since potential contributors may be more willing to contribute to a candidate that has received the endorsement of a prominent figure or personality.” Advisory, I.B.4.
The document prepared by Mr. Hess was a solicitation. Mr. Eisenscher received Mr. Hess’s solicitation through electronic mail and then sent the solicitation on to others with his name appearing at the top of the solicitation designating him as the person who sent the message. Given that Mr. Eisenscher works with IBT local unions and others in the labor movement, his name on the top of a solicitation could have influenced potential contributors to give money to Mr. Leedham.
James P. Hoffa
Hoffa Slate
September 16, 1998
Page 1
“Contributions may not be solicited by employers.” Advisory, I.B.4. Mr. Eisenscher is not an employer as defined by the Advisory. See Advisory, II.E. He is a professional employee who works in a small non-profit organization with no support staff to supervise and therefore would be an eligible contributor to the legal and accounting fund. Therefore, Mr. Eisenscher is permitted to solicit contributions for Mr. Leedham’s legal and accounting fund.
Accordingly, the protest is hereby DENIED.
Any interested party not satisfied with this determination may request a hearing before the Election Appeals Master within one (1) 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, Ews.
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) 624-3535. A copy of the protest must accompany the request for a hearing.
Sincerely,
Michael G. Cherkasky
Election Officers
MGC:mk
cc: Kenneth Conboy, Election Appeals Master