IN RE: ALEXANDRA POPE,
Protest Decision 2000 EAD 2
Issued: August 1, 2000
OEA Case No. PR060502NA
Alexandra Pope, a member of Local 805, filed a pre-election protest pursuant to Article XIII, Section 2(a) of the Rules for the 2000-2001 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election ("Rules").[1] Pope challenges actions listed in three categories: 1) the imposition of a temporary trusteeship over IBT Local 556 by General President James P. Hoffa and the removal by the trustee appointed by Hoffa of Maria Martinez from her position as chief shop steward at the Iowa Beef Processors facility in Pasco, Washington; 2) improper campaigning and improper use of union resources in support of the reelection of General President Hoffa at an April 2000 meeting of the Central Region Construction Trades Division; and 3) improper campaigning and use of union resources through articles critical of Tom Leedham, secretary-treasury of IBT Local 206, in various union publications in December 1999 and early 2000. These three categories of allegations have been severed for purposes of investigation and resolution. The first is addressed by this decision.
Election Administrator Representative Chris Mrak is assigned to the investigation of this protest.
The investigation revealed that Local 556 members Maria Martinez and Maria Sauceda have commenced litigation against the International Brotherhood of Teamsters in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington as Case No. CT-99-5094-WFN, under various provisions of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 411-415 and §§ 462-466, as well as Section 301 of the Labor-Management Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. §185 (the "Washington litigation"). In the Washington litigation, Martinez and Sauceda seek (as does the instant protest) an end to the Local 556 trusteeship and the return of Martinez to her position as chief shop steward.
The Election Administrator has reviewed the pleadings and other papers filed by the parties to the Washington litigation, as well as various discovery materials supplied by the parties. That litigation commenced on September 29, 1999, well before the May 2000 adoption of the Rules. Discovery in the Washington litigation is now closed. Trial is set for August 25, 2000. In addition, on March 3, 2000, the district court granted a motion for a preliminary injunction immediately reinstating Martinez to her position as chief shop steward, where she continues as of this writing.
The Election Administrator will defer decision in this matter until the conclusion of the trial in the Washington litigation. Prior Election Officers have often deferred to collectively-bargained grievance and arbitration procedures. See, Mullins, PR332 (October 29, 1998); Tapia, PR300 (October 8, 1998); Martinez, PR173 (August 27, 1998); Guerrero, P1315 (December 4, 1996); McBride, P1188 (November 19, 1996); Watson, P1179 (November 11, 1996), aff'd, 96 EAM 279; Golubovic, P440 (March 6, 1996); Braswell, P384 (February 27, 1996); Jordan, P196 (November 8, 1995); Harrington, P165 (September 27, 1995).
Here, the court does not have before it as Rulesviolations the question of the trusteeship and the removal of Martinez from her shop steward position. Yet the same was true as to the status of IBT election rulesissues in those arbitrations to which Election Officers have deferred. Even so, Election Officers deferred because "the issues presented [in the protest could] be fully resolved in other forums." Martinez, supra. This is also true here, since at a minimum the court has granted (in the form of its preliminary injunction restoring Martinez to her elected position) and may grant (as final relief) remedies that would affect the ruling and remedy here. Moreover, the findings of fact and conclusions of law the court will make will be worthy of review and possible adoption.
Despite this deferral, the Election Administrator has jurisdiction and authority to determine the instant protest on its merits. Further, as in prior deferrals to the arbitration process, the Election Administrator will not be bound, in whole or in part, by the court's decision or by any findings of fact or conclusions of law it makes. See Golubovic, P25 (July 21, 1995); Henderson, P760, aff'd, 91 EAM 187; aff'd, U.S. v. IBT, 776 F. Supp. 144 (S.D.N.Y. 1991), aff'd, 954 F.2d 801 (2d Cir. 1992).
Thus, while the Election Administrator will defer his decision here, he has the authority to conduct an independent investigation of these allegations of the protest and issue a decision on the merits based upon his determination and evaluation of the evidence presented to him.
Ms. Pope, Ms. Martinez and the IBT are directed to inform the Election Administrator of the court's decision at the conclusion of trial. Further, these parties are directed to provide the Election Administrator with supplemental position statements within five (5) days of the court's decision, which should address what, if any, impact the court's decision should have on the resolution of this protest. Any other interested party that wishes to do so may also file a position statement with the Election Administrator within that period.
Accordingly, the protest is DEFERRED.
Any interested party not satisfied with this determination may request a hearing before the Election Appeals Master within two (2) working days of receipt of this decision. The parties are reminded that, absent extraordinary circumstances, no party may rely upon evidence that was not presented to the Office of the Election Administrator in any such appeal. Requests for a hearing shall be made in writing, shall specify the basis for the appeal, and shall be served upon:
Kenneth Conboy
Election Appeals Master
Latham & Watkins
Suite 1000
885 Third Avenue
New York, New York 10022
Fax: 212.751.4864
Copies of the request for hearing must be served upon the parties listed above, as well as upon the Election Administrator for the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, c/o International Brotherhood of Teamsters, 25 Louisiana Ave. NW, Washington, D.C. 20001, all within the time prescribed above. A copy of the protest must accompany the request for hearing.
William A. Wertheimer, Jr.
William A. Wertheimer, Jr.
Election Administrator
cc: Kenneth Conboy
Chris Mrak
DISTRIBUTION LIST VIA UPS NEXT DAY AIR:
Alexandra Pope David Mark
322 North Fullerton Avenue Central Bldg.
Montclair, NJ 07042 Suite 412
810 Third Ave.
Michael Goldberg Seattle, WA 98104
Widener University School of Law
4601 Concord Pike Kenneth J. Pedersen
Wilmington, DL 19803 Davies, Roberts & Reid, LLP
101 Elliott Ave. West
Patrick Szymanski Suite 550
IBT General Counsel Seattle, WA 98119
25 Louisiana Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20001 Bradley Raymond
Finkel, Whitefield, Selik,
Maria Martinez Raymond, Ferrara & Feldman
4114 West Marie 32300 Northwestern Highway
Pasco, WA 99301 Suite 200
Farmington Hills, MI 48334
Jon L. Rabine
President David Levin, New York TDU
Al Hobart 500 State Street
Food Processing Division Director Brooklyn, NY 11217
Teamsters Joint Council 28
553 John Street Teamsters for a Democratic Union
Seattle, WA 98109 7437 Michigan Ave. Detroit, MI 48210
Barbara Harvey J. Douglas Korney
Suite 1800 Korney & Heldt
Penobscot Bldg. 30700 Telegraph Road
645 Griswold Suite 1551
Detroit, MI 48226 Bingham Farms, MI 48025
[1] This "reach-back" protest was filed within the 30-day period following the issuance of the Rules on May 5, 2000. It alleges violations occurring before the issuance of the Rules. Article XIV, Section 2(a), of the Rules states:
Protests regarding violations of the [Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act, as amended](including violations of the IBT Constitution) allegedly occurring prior to the date of issuance of these Rules and protest regarding any conduct allegedly occurring within the first twenty-eight (28) days after issuance of these Rules must be filed within thirty (30) days of the date of issuance, or such protests shall be waived.