November 9, 1998
VIA FACSIMILE AND UPS OVERNIGHT
Sue Yocum
November 9, 1998
Page 1
Sue Yocum
17800 Chorvat Avenue
Spring Hill, FL 34610
Executive Board
Teamsters Local Union 79
5818 E. MLK Jr. Boulevard
Tampa, FL 33619
Tom Leedham Campaign Office
P.O. Box 15877
Washington, DC 20003
Kenneth W. Wood, President
Teamsters Local Union 79
5818 E. MLK Jr. Boulevard
Tampa, FL 33619
James P. Hoffa
2593 Hounds Chase
Troy, MI 48098
Bradley T. Raymond, Esq.
Raymond, Ferrara & Feldman
32300 Northwestern Highway
Suite 200
Farmington Hills, MI 48334
Patrick J. Szymanski
Baptiste & Wilder
1150 Connecticut Ave. Suite 500
Washington, DC 20036
Arthur Z. Schwartz
Kennedy, Schwartz & Cure, P.C.
113 University Place
New York, NY 10003
Sue Yocum
November 9, 1998
Page 1
Re: Election Office Case No. PR-288-LU79-SEC
Gentlepersons:
Sue Yocum
November 9, 1998
Page 1
Sue Yocum, a member of Local Union 79, filed a pre-election protest pursuant to Article XIV, Section 2 of the Rules for the 1995-1996 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”) against Local Union 79 in Tampa, Florida and Local Union 79 President Ken Wood. Mr. Wood is also a candidate for Southern Region Vice-President on the Hoffa Unity Slate. The protester alleges the following: 1) a September 6, 1998 Labor Day picnic conducted by the local union was a rally and picnic to campaign for Mr. Hoffa; 2) the local union removed campaign materials supporting Tom Leedham, a candidate for general president, from the union hall and prevented the distribution or display of such materials in the union hall while allowing Hoffa campaign literature and paraphernalia to remain in the hall and to be distributed; 3) Local Union 79 officers harassed members at the Labor Day picnic to wear Hoffa campaign materials and to vote for Messrs. Hoffa and Wood; 4) the local union prohibited Leedham supporters from parking their vehicles with campaign materials in the driveway entrance area of the Local Union 79, but permitted vehicles with Hoffa campaign materials to park in the same location; 5) Local Union 79 officers hung a large Hoffa banner on their vehicles during the Labor Day picnic; 6) on several occasions, officers and business agents of the local union have worn campaign paraphernalia in violation of the Rules; and 7) on August 5, 1998, Brian Rothman, secretary-treasurer of the local union prevented a group of stewards from entering the union hall, in retaliation for their support of Mr. Leedham.
Local Union 79 responds as follows: 1) Mr. Wood denies that he campaigned, but admits that other officers campaigned at the Labor Day picnic and during the rally, and states that the Leedham supporters were also permitted to campaign; 2) Mr. Wood denies that he or any other officer of the local union removed Leedham campaign materials from the union hall and denies that any Hoffa campaign materials are disseminated from the hall. He admits, however, that employees and officers of the local union are permitted to keep campaign literature in their offices; 3) he denies that he or any officer harassed any attendee at the Labor Day picnic; 4) Thor Johnson, local Union trustee, asked a member with a Leedham sign on his truck to move his vehicle because it was blocking ingress and egress; 5) Mr. Wood admits that an officer hung a Hoffa banner on his vehicle during the Labor Day picnic, but states that the vehicle is owned by the officer; 6) Mr. Wood and the other officers and business agents deny any wearing of campaign paraphernalia in violation of the Rules; and 7) Mr. Rothman denies that he blocked stewards from entering the union hall.
This protest was investigated by Adjunct Regional Coordinator Maureen Geraghty.
The Election Officer had received a letter from the protester on August 31, 1998 which made similar allegations concerning the display and distribution of campaign materials from the Local Union 79 offices. At that time the Election Officer had Ms. Geraghty send an investigator to Local Union 79 to examine the union hall. The investigator found the following: a “Hoffa Now” bumper sticker in Organizer Bob Maldunas’ office; and a Hoffa baseball cap with a collection of baseball caps and an 8 ½ by 11 inch framed photograph of Messrs. Hoffa and Wood with a Hoffa bumper sticker on it displayed in Mr. Wood’s office. The investigator found no other campaign materials at the union offices.
- Labor Day Picnic and Rally
Local Union 79 sponsored a Labor Day picnic on September 6 at its building. The Labor Day picnic is an annual event and is widely attended by local politicians and community representatives. On this occasion the picnic was attended by 700 to 800 people. The picnic cost the local union between four and five thousand dollars.
Sue Yocum
November 9, 1998
Page 1
The facts are largely undisputed. Hoffa paraphernalia was pervasively displayed and distributed at the local union picnic. Local Union 79 officers and employees wore Hoffa hats, shirts and stickers and passed out Hoffa stickers to picnic participants. The 50 members working at the picnic were instructed by Local Union 79 officers to wear black and gold work shirts which were coordinated to match the Hoffa campaign t-shirts. Local Union Trustee Thor Johnson (who was dressed in Hoffa paraphernalia) was at the entrance to the parking lot directing the cars to parking spaces. As drivers spoke to Mr. Johnson, he pasted Hoffa stickers on their clothing and offered stickers to other passengers in the car. The large Local Union 79 sign in the driveway by the hall had a Hoffa sign attached to it. Mr. Wood states that he does not know who attached the Hoffa sign to the Local Union 79 sign. Leedham supporters attempted to put a sign there also but it was removed.
A large floral centerpiece on the table had a Hoffa sign on it. Members who worked serving food to members and guests in the food line were asked by Mr. Rothman and
Mr. Johnson to wear a Hoffa sticker on their clothing. Indeed, one server who was wearing a Leedham sticker was asked to leave the food line as Mr. Wood came through so as not to ruin the “photo opportunity.”
Supporters of Mr. Leedham also campaigned freely at the picnic. There is no evidence that there were pro-Hoffa or pro-Wood speeches made at the picnic, nor is there evidence that members and others at the picnic were coerced to wear Hoffa stickers (other than Mr. Johnson’s pasting stickers on drivers’ clothing at the entrance).
During the picnic, Mr. Johnson draped a huge Hoffa banner on his truck and parked the truck on the edge of the driveway in front of the local union hall, parallel to the highway. Shortly thereafter, Leedham supporter Bill Fowler pulled his truck next to Mr. Johnson’s and draped a large Leedham banner over his truck. A few minutes later, Local Union 79 Vice President Leo Krug asked Mr. Fowler to move his truck stating that it was blocking the parking lot entrance. Mr. Fowler moved his truck forward three to four feet. The Leedham banner remained visible from the lawn in front of the local union and from the road.
The Rules are designed to prevent campaigning which is discriminatory at union membership meetings and during union-sponsored activities. Thus, Article VIII,
Section 5(a)(4) reads, in relevant part:
(4) A Local Union shall not discriminate or permit discrimination in favor or against any candidate in conjunction with its meeting or otherwise. This requirement shall apply not only to formal presentations by or on behalf of candidates but also to informal campaign activities, such as, for example, comments on candidates during meetings . . . .
Sue Yocum
November 9, 1998
Page 1
Article VIII, Section 5(a)(4) applies to local unions “or otherwise,” includes social gatherings such as picnics. See Knox, P-926-JC43-MGN (September 30, 1996). The local union allowing supporters of candidates for Hoffa and Leedham to campaign at the Labor Day picnic therefore, does not violate the Rules. There is no evidence that the request to
Mr. Fowler to move his truck violated the Rules.
The Rules strictly prohibit the use of union resources for campaigning. Article VIII, Section 11(c) specifically states,
Union funds, facilities, equipment, stationary, personnel, etc. may not be used to assist in campaigning unless the Union is reimbursed at fair market value for such assistance, and unless all candidates are provided equal access to such assistance and are notified in advance, in writing of the availability of such assistance.
In conducting the Labor Day picnic, the Local Union 79 went much further than supporting the members right to campaign. The local union used its facilities and personnel to create the impression that Local Union 79 supported Mr. Hoffa as an entity by the following activities: 1) Allowing a Hoffa sign to be affixed to the local union 79 banner; 2) including Hoffa signs on the floral display at the table; 3) instructing the picnic workers to wear gold and black to coordinate with the Hoffa t-shirts worn by the officers and employees of the local union; and 4) asking food servers to wear Hoffa stickers.
Displaying Hoffa signs on the Local Union sign and the floral arrangement is an improper campaign contribution to Mr. Hoffa. See Pope, P-046-JC7-PNJ (October 13, 1995), aff’d, 95 - Elec. App. - 35 (KC) (November 14, 1995). Coordinating Hoffa colors for the workers at the picnic and causing picnic workers associated with the local union to wear Hoffa stickers clearly gave the impression that the local union supported Mr. Hoffa as an entity. See Lopez, P-513-LU743-CHI (March 20, 1996), aff’d , 96 - Elec. App. - 155 (KC) (April 13, 1996) (“By using the colors of the 1996 membership buttons, Local Union 743 has associated the Carey campaign with the local union to an extent that the buttons are an endorsement of the campaign by the local union.”)
II. Hoffa Banners and Other Materials on Officer Vehicles
Local Union 79 does not purchase or lease vehicles for its officers or employees, but does pay its employees a $400 per month car allowance. Employees and officers may use the vehicles for their personal use. Under these circumstances, it does not violate the Rules for the officers to use the cars for campaign activities including the display of banners and bumper stickers. See Article VIII, Section 11(c).
Sue Yocum
November 9, 1998
Page 1
III. Officials Wearing Campaign Paraphernalia
There is no dispute that Mr. Wood, Mr. Krug and other Local Union 79 officers wear Hoffa shirts and hats at the local union office. The investigation found that Local Union 79 officers have worn Hoffa paraphernalia on occasions other than daily work at the office. The investigation found two instances where paraphernalia was displayed.
On August 8, 1998, Local Union 79 conducted a union-wide stewards training seminar. Business Agent Bob Meeks and Mr. Johnson wore Hoffa t-shirts during the meeting.
Second, approximately August 16, 1998, Messrs. Wood and Krug attended a rally for Citrus County employees, who voted for representation by Local Union 79, at the time Local Union 79 had been certified as the bargaining representative, but no contract had been negotiated. Mr. Wood addressed the crowd at the rally by speaking from the main podium. Mr. Wood and Mr. Krug were wearing Hoffa t-shirts and hats. There were Citrus County employees, members of the community and local union members in attendance.
The Rules at Article VIII, Section 11(d) state that “no restrictions shall be placed upon candidates’ or members’ preexisting rights to solicit support . . . or engage in similar activities on employer or Union premises.” The Advisory on Wearing of Campaign Buttons and Other Emblems (September 20, 1995) further explains this right as follows:
Among the rights so protected by the Rules is the right of IBT members to wear campaign emblems on buttons, t-shirts or hats while working. . . .
The Advisory also notes that there are restrictions on this right for union employees as follows:
Sue Yocum
November 9, 1998
Page 1
[A]n unrelated third party might assume that the Union entity was supporting or opposing a particular candidate or group of candidates if the Union officer, business agent or other employee were permitted to wear campaign emblems during such time they were representing the Union in relations with unrelated third parties. Accordingly, while Union officers, business agents, and employees may wear campaign emblems during working hours and while engaged in their regular Union business, they may not wear such emblems when representing the Union before or with an unrelated third party. Thus, Union officers, business agents and employees may not wear campaign emblems when meeting with an employer of IBT members for collective bargaining or grievance resolution, when participating either as an advocate, witness or panel member in grievance hearings, when appearing on behalf of the Union before legislative, administrative or judicial tribunals, when making public appearances on behalf of the Union, or when engaged in similar type activities where the wearing of a campaign emblem might inappropriately suggest that the Union with which the officer, business agent or other employee is affiliated, is an entity supporting or opposing any particular candidate or group of candidates.
While it is not a violation of the Rules for Mr. Wood and other officers and employees to wear campaign paraphernalia while working at their union offices or in other meetings like the steward’s seminar or membership meetings, where only union members are present, it was a violation for Messrs. Wood and Krug to wear Hoffa t-shirts and hats at the Citrus County rally. The rally was attended by more than just local union members, and was clearly “a public appearance[ ] by the officers on behalf of the Union.” Therefore, wearing the paraphernalia at the rally gave the improper public impression that the union as an entity was supporting Mr. Hoffa.
IV. Display and Distribution of Campaign Materials at the Union Hall
The investigation did not reveal any evidence that Hoffa materials were ever distributed from the local union hall. However, the Election Officer’s investigation revealed that Hoffa paraphernalia was in the offices of Messrs. Maldunas and Wood. Specifically, the investigator found a “Hoffa Now” sticker affixed to a display rack in Mr. Maldunas’ office, and a picture of Messrs. Wood and Hoffa with a Hoffa bumper sticker affixed to the frame and a Hoffa hat in a baseball hat display in Mr. Wood office.
Article VIII, Section 11(c) of the Rules bars an IBT local union from providing its resources to a candidate. The display of these materials in the offices of Local Union 79 is a violation of the Rules. As the Election Appeals Master stated in In re Yeakel, 96 - Elec. App. - 57 (KC) (January 23, 1996), “there is ample support for the Election Officer’s finding that [the local union secretary-treasures] misused a union facility in violation of the Rules when she displayed a campaigned-related photograph on her office wall.”
- Incident on August 5, 1998
On August 5, 1998, the protester went to the union hall to attend a stewards’ meeting. When she opened the door to the meeting room, she saw a group of men sitting at a conference table. She recognized Mr. Rothman at the meeting and states she spotted what looked like campaign leaflets on the table, but did not see what the leaflets said. The protester quickly shut the door and waited outside for the room to empty.
Sue Yocum
November 9, 1998
Page 1
A few minutes later, another steward also tried to enter the room and stopped when she realized the room was occupied. She joined the protester outside and after a few minutes, the women decided to enter the local union offices through the back entrance. They then discovered that the back entrance and security gate were locked and they had to wait outside until the meeting inside was adjourned and the meeting hall door was unlocked.
Mr. Rothman states that the meeting was for contract negotiations and that he locked the meeting room to avoid further interruptions after the protester opened the door. He denies he locked the security gate.
The protester admits she did not read the leaflets. In the face of Mr. Rothman’s statement that he was in a contract negotiation meeting, the Election Officer finds no evidence to support the protester’s allegation.
Accordingly, the protest is GRANTED as to the improper use of union resources as outlined in Sections I and IV above and as to improper wearing of campaign paraphernalia by Messrs. Wood and Krug; and DENIED in all other respects.
When the Election Officer determines that the Rules have been violated, he “may take whatever remedial action is appropriate.” Article XIV, Section 4. In fashioning the appropriate remedy, the Election Officer views the nature and seriousness of the violation as well as the potential for interfering with the election process.
In remedying the conduct herein, the Election Officer recognizes that the ballots have already been mailed and therefore remedying conduct which occurred in August and September is difficult at this point. Nevertheless, the members and voters from Local Union 79 have the right to be advised of the misconduct by their officers. Accordingly, the Election Officer orders the following:
1. The officers and business agents of Local Union 79 shall immediately cease and desist from the following conduct:
a. Utilizing union resources to support campaigning including but not limited to the display of campaign paraphernalia on union property and signs; and
b. Wearing campaign paraphernalia when meeting with unrelated third parties or at public appearances;
Sue Yocum
November 9, 1998
Page 1
2. Mr. Wood is a candidate on the Hoffa Unity Slate, and the improper use of union resources found herein supported Mr. Hoffa’s candidacy. Mr. Hoffa denies any knowledge of the events. The Rules state that Mr. Hoffa’s Campaign is strictly liable for improper union contributions. See Article XII, Section 1. Accordingly, by 5 p.m. (EST) on Wednesday, November 11, 1998, the campaigns of Messrs. Hoffa and Wood shall jointly pay Local Union 79 five hundred dollars ($500) for the use of union resources to campaign at the Labor Day picnic. This is an estimated amount based upon the pervasive use of union-sponsored campaigning at the picnic.
3. By 5 p.m. (EST) on Wednesday, November 11, 1998, Mr. Wood shall sign the attached “Notice to Members of Local Union 79" and post it at all work sites and at the local union hall.
4. Messrs. Wood and Hoffa shall file affidavits with the Election Officer detailing their compliance with this order and attaching a copy of the signed notice and the checks by November 12, 1998.
An order of the Election Officer, unless otherwise stayed, takes immediate effect against a party found to be in violation of the Rules. In re Lopez, 96 - Elec. App. - 73 (KC) (February 13, 1996).
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
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
Maureen Geraghty, Adjunct Regional Coordinator
NOTICE TO ALL MEMBERS OF LOCAL UNION 79
by Order of IBT Election Officer Michael G. Cherkasky
The IBT Election Officer has issued a decision finding that Ken Wood and certain other officers and employees of the local union improperly used union resources to support the candidacies of Mr. Wood and James P. Hoffa.
The decision finds that we used union resources to support these candidacies at a Labor Day picnic held at the union hall by permitting campaign signs on union property and using workers at the picnic to engage in campaigning. The Election Officer also found that campaign paraphernalia is improperly displayed in union offices and that Mr. Wood and Local Union Vice-President Leo Krug improperly wore campaign paraphernalia at a public rally conducted for Citrus County employees.
The union is strictly forbidden from using its resources to support campaigning. My campaign and that of Mr. Hoffa have been ordered to repay the local union $500 for the improper use of resources. Moreover, the officers and employees of the local union have been ordered to cease and desist from such conduct in violation of the Election Rules.
__________________________
Kenneth W. Wood, President
This is an official notice that must remain posted until December 3, 1998, and must not be defaced or altered in any manner or be covered with any other material.
Posted by order of Michael G. Cherkasky, IBT Election Officer