September 28, 1998
VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL
Bob Hasegawa
September 28, 1998
Page 1
Bob Hasegawa
3121 16th Avenue S.
Seattle, WA 98144
Charles Alessi
Director, Labor Relations
Disneyland Resort
1313 Harbor Boulevard
P.O. Box 3232
Anaheim, CA XXX-XX-XXXX
Paul Alan Levy, Esq.
Public Citizen Litigation Group
1600 20th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20009
Arthur Z. Schwartz, Esq.
Kennedy, Schwartz & Cure
113 University Place
New York, NY 10003
Tom Leedham Campaign Office
P. O. Box 15877
Washington, D.C. 20003
Bob Hasegawa
September 28, 1998
Page 1
Re: Election Office Case No. PR-204-LU174-EOH
Gentlemen:
Bob Hasegawa, a member of Local Union 174 and a candidate for International office on the Tom Leedham “Rank and File Power” Slate (“Leedham 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 the Walt Disney Company (“Disney”). The protester alleges that on August 4, 1998 he went to the employee parking lot at Disneyland in Anaheim, California to campaign. The protester states that a Disney labor official Mike Lorenz ordered Mr. Hasegawa off the parking lot. As a remedy, Mr. Hasegawa asks the Election Officer to order Disney to provide him with travel expenses and two days’ pay to permit him to take leave without pay to travel to Anaheim to campaign.
Bob Hasegawa
September 28, 1998
Page 1
Disneyland responds that when Mr. Hasegawa arrived at the employee parking lot, a security host approached him and asked him to identify himself and to state his business. Mr. Hasegawa identified himself as a Teamster and stated that he had a right to be in the parking lot. The Security Host asked Mr. Hasegawa to contact the Disneyland Labor Relations Office and explain his situation and provided Mr. Hasegawa with the telephone number. Mr. Hasegawa did not contact the Labor Relations Office and was asked to leave the premises by Security Supervisor Mike Lorenz.
This protest was investigated by Deputy Election Officer Benetta M. Mansfield.
Article VIII, Section 11(e) of the Rules creates a limited right-of-access to IBT members and candidates to distribute literature and seek support for their campaign in any parking lot used by union members to park their vehicles in connection with their employment. While “presumptively available,” this right is not without limitations. It is not available to any employee on working time and candidates and their supporters cannot solicit or campaign to employees who are on working time. It is also restricted to campaigning that will not materially interfere with an employer’s normal business activities. An employer may require reasonable identification.
The Deputy Election Officer discussed the denial of access with Charles Alessi, Director of Labor Relations at Disneyland Resort. Mr. Alessi states that it is Disneyland’s full intention to comply with the Rules. Mr. Alessi explains that within the past year, Disneyland has moved the employee parking lot off-site. All employees parking in the lot take a shuttle bus to the Disneyland employee entrance. The shuttle bus stop is located in the employee parking lot. Disneyland will permit campaigning in the employee parking lot at the shuttle bus stop where all employees who park their vehicles board the shuttle bus. In addition, Disneyland will permit campaigners to be near the employee timeshack at the Disneyland entrance. This entrance is where all employees enter the work site. Mr. Alessi states that campaigners should identify themselves to the security guard at either location and security will page Mr. Alessi who will permit such access. Mr. Alessi further states that IBT members have campaigned on this basis since the protest was filed.
It is Disneyland’s position that it would have allowed Mr. Hasegawa to campaign had he properly identified himself to the Labor Relations Office. As access has now been granted, the Election Officer need not resolve that factual issue.
Regarding Mr. Hasegawa’s request for travel expenses and pay to return to Anaheim, the Election Officer rejects this request. In these circumstances, and where the protest has been resolved with the employer’s agreement to permit access, such a remedy is inappropriate.
Accordingly, the Election Officer is satisfied that the protest has been RESOLVED.
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 Hasegawa
September 28, 1998
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, 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