September 14, 1998
VIA FIRST-CLASS MAIL
Kathy Peters
September 14, 1998
Page 1
Kathy Peters
41056 Belrose Road
Abbotsford, BC V3G 2T1
CANADA
Louis Lacroix, President
Teamsters Canada
2540 Daniel-Johnson Boulevard
Suite 804
Laval, PQ H7T 2S3
CANADA
Louis Lacroix Team Canada Slate
c/o Ron Douglas
Teamsters Canada
No. 204-1867 West Broadway
Vancouver, BC V6J 4W1
CANADA
Shireen Douglas
Managing Editor
Teamsters Canada
No. 204-1867 West 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
Garnet Zimmerman, President
Teamsters Local Union 31
1 Grosvenor Square
Delta, BC V3M 5S1
CANADA
Kathy Peters
September 14, 1998
Page 1
Re: Election Office Case No. PR-221-CAN-EOH
Gentlepersons:
Kathy Peters
September 14, 1998
Page 1
Kathy Peters, a member of Local Union 31, 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 Louis Lacroix and the Louis Lacroix Team Canada Slate. Mr. Lacroix is president of Teamsters Canada and not a current candidate. Ms. Peters alleges that Teamsters Canada magazine, a union-financed publication, was used by Mr. Lacroix and Teamsters Canada to support the candidacy of Joe McLean and Larry McDonald. Both Mr. McLean and Mr. McDonald are candidates for Teamsters Canada vice - president on the Louis Lacroix Team Canada Slate. Teamsters Canada and Mr. Lacroix deny the allegation.
The protest was investigated by Election Office Counsel David S. Paull.
All of Ms. Peter’s allegations relate to the Teamsters Canada issue for May/June/July 1998. An article reporting that Mr. McLean replaced Charles Thibault as Teamsters Canada vice - president appears on page three of that issue. The article begins with the general headline “Around the Union - Looking out for Canadian Teamsters” and provides basic information about Mr. McLean’s experience as an IBT officer. Additionally, the article states that Mr. McLean is married, has children, has grand-children and is active in Joint Council 52's effort to support a charitable organization that helps disabled children. The article is four paragraphs in length. A small photograph of Mr. McLean, approximately an inch and one-half square, accompanies the article.
Ms. Peters first alleges that the picture of Mr. McLean violates the Rules at Article VIII, Section 8(a)(2), which provides that a union-financed publication may not use “a larger or more attractive picture of someone than had previously been used if that person is a candidate, unless there is a valid journalistic reason for it.” In support of her allegation, the protester contends that the picture used in this article is “larger or more attractive” because it is a close up and the three previous photographs of Mr. McLean were “group shots taken from a distance.”
The protester provided no evidence that the dimensions of the photograph used on page 3 of Teamsters Canada were larger than photographs previously used. Rather, she indicated only that the size of Mr. McLean’s image within the protested photograph is larger. Regardless, the recent appointment of Mr. McLean to the office of vice - president is sufficient “journalistic reason” to justify the use of a photograph showing Mr. McLean’s face in close up.
Ms. Peters further challenges the very brief reference in the article to Mr. McLean’s marriage, his children, his grand-children and his charitable activities, contending that Teamsters Canada violated the Rules at Article VIII, Section 8(a)(4) which provides that a union-financed publication may not “print features and accompanying photographs about insignificant or unnewsworthy events in which the accomplishment or qualities of any candidate are heralded.”
Violations of Article VIII, Section 8(a)(4) occur when trivial or non-meritorious activities of a union official or employee are discussed in a union-financed publication for the purpose of providing campaign publicity. See, Martin, P-010-IBT-PNJ (August 17, 1995), aff’d, 95 - Elec. App. - 18 (KC) (October 2, 1995). The appointment of a new officer by the IBT is an event of significance. Union-financed articles which report on the selection of new officers properly exercise the reporting function. The article makes no reference to the election or to Mr. McLean’s candidacy. The brief references to Mr. McLean’s family and charitable activities are appropriate and not campaign oriented. Atha, PR-127-IBT-EOH (July 8, 1998).
Kathy Peters
September 14, 1998
Page 1
Ms. Peters further objects to the use of a second photograph of Mr. McLean, also displayed on page three of the union-financed publication. The two inch square photograph shows Mr. McLean with another individual and accompanies a second article entitled “Teamsters Canada voices labour’s concerns to Ottawa and proposes solutions.” The article describes an official IBT meeting with the Canadian government attended by Mr. McLean, Mr. Lacroix, and Teamsters Canada Government Affairs Director, Francois Laporte.
Reports about the IBT’s interaction with government is a legitimate union activity and of interest to union members. Hoffa, PR-013-IBT-EOH (November 5, 1997, aff’d, 97 - Elec. App. - 332 (KC) (December 8, 1997). Pictures of candidates are permitted in union-financed publications when directly related to a matter of legitimate interest to the membership. See Hoffa, P-202-IBT-EOH (November 17, 1995), aff’d, 95 - Elec. App. - 39 (KC) (November 30, 1995); Lamy, P-258-IBT-EOH (December 18, 1995), aff’d, 96 - Elec. App. - 53 (KC) (January 11, 1996); Gaon, PR-160-LU639-EOH et.seq. (July 20, 1998). Like the photo in the first article, the second picture of Mr. McLean is directly related to a report on a newsworthy subject. The two small pictures of Mr. McLean, contained within a single page of a magazine which is approximately 12 pages in length, are not excessive. Hoffa, PR-028-PCT-NYC (November 18, 1997).
Additionally, the protester alleges that the absence of any references in the second article to the government-related activities of other candidates on behalf of the IBT is a violation of the Rules at Article VIII, Section 8(a)(5) which provides that no union-financed publication may report “on activities of a particular candidate where the same or similar activities of other similarly situated candidates for the same office(s) have not been similarly reported.”
There is no evidence that the protested issue of Teamsters Canada reported on the activities of Mr. McLean as a candidate, but only in his official capacity. Article VIII, Section 8(a)(5) restricts the “reporting on activities of a particular candidate,” but does not prohibit union-financed reports on the legitimate activities of union officers or employees. Further, the Rules do not require a union-financed publication, reporting on the activities of a candidate acting in an official capacity at a union event, to also report on the activities of another candidate at that same event. Martin, supra at 26.
Finally, Ms. Peters alleges that the May/June/July 1998 issue of Teamsters Canada violates the Rules at Article VIII, Section 8(a)(6) which prohibits a union-financed publication from “featuring a particular candidate, unless all candidates for the same position are given equal treatment, equal space and equal prominence.” The provision further states that, “To the extent candidates are aligned, published materials shall be reviewed with respect to all such candidates as a whole.”
The allegation is based on the protester’s assertion that Mr. Lacroix’s “photograph appears at least 55 times in the five years Teamsters Canada has been published,” that his picture has appeared in a number of other union-financed publications and that Mr. Lacroix “openly
Kathy Peters
September 14, 1998
Page 1
supports the candidacy of Joe McLean and Larry McDonald.” The protester makes a pointed reference to campaign material, published under Mr. Lacroix’s name, which supports Mr. McLean and Mr. McDonald and appears in the special campaign pages printed in the July/August 1998 issue of the Teamster magazine.
The protester did not allege that the appearance of Mr. Lacroix’s photograph in any of the previous union-financed publications were themselves in violation of the Rules. There is no evidence that Mr. Lacroix was “featured as a candidate” in violation of the Rules. Further, no evidence has been provided showing that Mr. Lacroix’s support of Mr. McLean or Mr. McDonald involved the use of union funds.
As a union officer acting in an official capacity, Mr. Lacroix may direct that union funds be used to “advise and report to the membership on issues of general concern.” Atha, PR-001-IBT-EOH (October 10, 1997). As an IBT member, Mr. Lacroix retains the right under the Rules at Article VIII, Section 11(a) to “participate in campaign activities, including the right to run for office, to support or oppose any candidate, to aid or campaign for any candidate, and to make personal campaign contributions.”
The publication of Mr. Lacroix’s photograph in a union-financed publication, even on a regular basis, does not by itself constitute campaigning. The Rules permit the publication of any picture of any union member, including that of Mr. Lacroix, as long as publication is not campaigning. The protester has submitted no evidence that Mr. Lacroix’s activities on behalf of candidates is improper. The Rules do not require Mr. Lacroix to surrender his right to support candidates simply because his picture appears regularly as a union officer in union-financed publications.
Accordingly, the protest is 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, Esq.
Latham & Watkins
885 Third Avenue, Suite 1000
New York, NY 10022
Fax: (212) 751-4864
Kathy Peters
September 14, 1998
Page 1
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
MGC:mk
cc: Kenneth Conboy, Election Appeals Master