IN RE: DENNIS NAZELLI,
Protest Decision 2001 EAD 207
Issued: March 2, 2001
OEA Case No. PR021711MI
Dennis Nazelli, a member of Local 372 and candidate for delegate, filed a pre-election protest pursuant to Article XIII, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the 2000-2001 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election ("Rules"). Nazelli alleges that he has been subject to discrimination because he has not had direct access to casino workers, who are new Local 372 members comprising about forty percent of the local's total membership.
Specifically, Nazelli alleges that: 1) the membership list provided to him by the local contained no workplace or other information to enable him to contact the new casino workers; 2) he was discriminated against because Al Derey, Local 372's secretary-treasurer and Nazelli's opponent for delegate, met casino workers in the course of obtaining membership cards; 3) any attempt to meet casino workers in the parking lots would be fruitless because members of Local 372 comprise less than ten percent of casino employees; 4) Local 372 is mailing ballots past the date in the local union plan to members who pay their dues before the end of February; and 5) he cannot post materials on a casino break room bulletin board because only people with gaming licenses can enter the break room.
Election Administrator representative Jason Weidenfeld investigated the protest.
Findings of Fact
In October 2000 the Detroit Casino Council (the "Council") ratified a contract covering unionized employees at the MGM Grand Detroit Casino and the Motor City Casino, including about 250 workers who are, or soon will be, dues-paying members of Teamsters Local 372. This represents about forty percent of Local 372's membership. Notwithstanding the contract ratification, a common dues structure had to be approved by the IBT General Executive Board (the "GEB") with respect to the Local 372 Teamsters.
On January 18, 2001, the GEB approved the dues structure and Local 372 began signing up casino workers.[1] Casino workers hired before February 1, 2001 had their initiation fees waived and their dues waived through January 2001. They must pay February dues. Casino workers hired on or after February 1, 2001 pay initiation fees and begin paying dues the month after the month of hiring. Therefore, a casino worker hired in January 2001 would not pay initiation fees but would pay dues starting in February. A casino worker hired in February would pay $150 in initiation fees and would begin paying dues in March. Contrary to a statement in Nazelli's protest, the GEB did not generally waive both the initiation fee and first month's dues for these members. As of February 28, 2001, more than 200 casino workers represented by Local 372 had authorized dues check-off.
Derey, as secretary-treasurer, has met many casino workers while attempting to obtain cards authorizing dues check-off. Nazelli has not had this opportunity. Derey also has access to casino break rooms and bulletin boards because he has registered with the Michigan Gaming Control Board as a representative of Local 372. Even though Derey has not posted any campaign materials at the casinos, he told our investigator that the boards could be used to post such materials. Derey told our investigator that the Council contract did not identify permissible or prohibited uses of the bulletin boards.
At around the time when ballots were being mailed, Nazelli asked Veronica Stevenson, a Local 372 member and IBT representative, whether she would post his campaign publicity in the casino break rooms or bulletin boards. As an IBT representative, Stevenson has access to the casino break rooms.
Nazelli and Stevenson agree that Nazelli asked Stevenson whether she would post Nazelli's campaign materials in the casino break rooms. Nazelli alleges that Stevenson would not respond directly initially, instead implying that no one looked at the bulletin boards. Stevenson's recollection differs somewhat. She told our investigator that she told Nazelli that as an IBT representative, she could not post campaign materials. Nazelli and Stevenson agree that Nazelli next asked whether Stevenson was supporting Derey. She answered affirmatively. Nevertheless, Stevenson told our investigator, she would not post any campaign materials for Derey had he asked. We find that Stevenson indicated to Nazelli that she would not post his materials and that, only upon inquiry, did Stevenson inform Nazelli that she was supporting Derey. We also find that Stevenson has not and would not post campaign materials for Derey.
We also find that Local 372 offered Nazelli an opportunity to review a membership list. On February 15, 2001, Nazelli requested to view Local 372's membership list. Nazelli arranged with Local 372's office manager, Gretchen Schumann, to review a membership list the next day. When Nazelli arrived to review the list, Schumann showed him a stack of mailing labels that had been provided to her by the IBT the day before. Schumann told our investigator that the labels were arranged as the IBT had prepared them, in either social security or zip code order. The labels had name, address, social security, employer code, and alphanumeric information.
When Nazelli saw the labels, he believed that they lacked worksite information and indicated that they would not be useful. Schumann told our investigator that these labels are what she knows to be a "membership list," although such a list could be prepared and arranged alphabetically, by employer code, or by any other of the label's parameters. No membership list has been prepared for Derey, who has not requested one. If he does, Schumann has confirmed that he will receive information in the same format as offered to Nazelli.
It is undisputed that at the two casinos where they are employed, Local 372 members comprise less than ten percent of the employees. Nazelli does not allege that access to the parking lots has been restricted.
Lastly, we find no evidence that Local 372 is mailing ballots to members based on whether they have paid their dues. Rather, since the initial mailing of ballots, Schumann has sent ballots to new members, to members who requested replacement ballots, and to members whose original ballots were returned as undeliverable.
Analysis
The Rules prohibit discrimination by a local union in favor of one delegate candidate over another. For example, Article VII, Section 2 prohibits discrimination "with respect to access or use of the membership list." Other provisions of the Rules prohibit employer contributions toward candidates' campaigns, the use by candidates of local union funds or facilities unless each other candidate knows in advance that such funds or facilities are available, and employer discrimination in allowing candidates access to employer property. Article XI, Section 1; Article VII, Section 11(c); and Article VII, Section 11(f).
Although the Rules seek to prevent discrimination, they do not and cannot mandate that all candidates have identical opportunities to meet members. Derey has come into contact with casino workers as a result of the fulfillment of his duties as Local 372's secretary-treasurer. He has access to break rooms because of his attempts to obtain signed cards authorizing dues check-off. Although Nazelli does not have these opportunities, they arise out of Derey's responsibility to represent Local 372 and do not evidence discrimination.
Likewise, we do not find that Stevenson discriminated against Nazelli by not posting his campaign materials. She has indicated that she has not and will not post such materials for any candidate. Moreover, she revealed her support of Derey only after questioning by Nazelli. As a Local 372 member, Stevenson has a right to support either candidate. Her response to Nazelli does not evidence discriminatory access to bulletin boards.
Next, we find no evidence of discrimination regarding parking lot access. Nazelli and Derey have the same opportunity to solicit support in casino workers' parking lots, even if Nazelli does not find this option to be viable.
We also find no evidence that ballots are being mailed improperly. The Rules permit voting by members whose dues have been paid "through the month prior to the month in which the election is held." Article V, Section 1. We find no violation in Local 372's efforts to enfranchise the newest portion of its membership. We also find no evidence that dues payments have played any role in determining who would receive ballots.
Finally, as to Nazelli's allegation that the mailing labels offered no useful information, we find no evidence of discrimination. Each candidate for delegate at Local 372 has the right to "inspect a list containing the last known names and addresses" of members. Article VII, Section 2. Although a stack of labels may not be as easy to review quickly as a sheet of papers, the stack contained Local 372 members' names and addresses, along with additional information. If Derey requests a membership list, he will be provided with information in the same format.
Accordingly, the protest is DENIED.
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 all other parties, as well as upon the Election Administrator for the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, 727 15th Street NW, Tenth Floor, Washington, DC 20005, all within the time period 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
2001 EAD 207
DISTRIBUTION LIST VIA UPS NEXT DAY AIR:
Patrick Szymanski
IBT General Counsel
25 Louisiana Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20001
Bradley T. Raymond
Finkel, Whitefield, Selik,
Raymond, Ferrara & Feldman
32300 Northwestern Highway
Suite 200
Farmington Hills, MI 48334
J. Douglas Korney
Korney & Heldt
30700 Telegraph Road
Suite 1551
Bingham Farms, MI 48025
Barbara Harvey
Penobscot Building
Suite 1800
645 Griswold
Detroit, MI 48226
Betty Grdina
Yablonski, Both & Edelman
Suite 800
1140 Connecticut Ave. NW
Washington, D.C. 20036
Tom Leedham c/o Stefan Ostrach
110 Mayfair
Eugene, OR 97404
Alfred P. Derey
IBT Local 372
2741 Trumbull Avenue
Detroit, MI 48216
Dennis Nazelli
19785 Purling Brook
Livonia, MI 48152
Michael Nicholson
122 S. Main St.
Suite 210
Ann Arbor, MI 48104
[1] For purposes of this decision, "casino workers" refers solely to casino workers who are Local 372 members.