March 12, 1996
VIA UPS OVERNIGHT
Tom Landsman
1515 Rudel Road, Apt. 901
Tomball, TX 77375
Jim Buck, Trustee
Teamsters Local Union 988
3100 Katy Freeway
Houston, TX 77007
Re: Election Office Case No. P-494-LU988-SOU
Gentlemen:
A pre-election protest was filed pursuant to Article XIV, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the 1995-1996 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”) by
Tom Landsman, a member of Local Union 988 and a candidate for delegate. Mr. Landsman alleges that Local Union 988 Trustee Jim Buck responded to a letter of resignation submitted by the protester in a “scurrilous, scandalous, libelous and unsubstantiated” manner with the goal of sabotaging the “Local 988 Delegates for Hoffa Slate” on which the protester is a candidate.
Mr. Landsman asserts that Mr. Buck, in posting his letter of response to the protester, caused the response to be widely circulated throughout the local union, which adversely affected his entire slate and the outcome of the local union delegate and alternate elections.
In response, Mr. Buck states his letter defended the trusteeship of Local Union 988 and responded to allegations made by Mr. Landsman. By posting the letter on a bulletin board at the protester’s workplace, Mr. Buck states that he used the same forum as did Mr. Landsman when he posted his resignation. Finally, Mr. Buck denies having further circulated the letter to the membership of Local Union 988.
This protest was investigated by Regional Coordinator Dolores Hall.
Tom Landsman
March 12, 1996
Page 1
Mr. Landsman had served for approximately four years as a shop steward at Hadley Auto Transport in Houston. In January 1996, a petition was received by Mr. Buck, the trustee, from employees at Hadley, requesting that an election be held for steward. An election was subsequently held and, several Hadley employees, including the protester, complained to
Mr. Buck about the lack of procedural safeguards affecting the election’s administration. Because of irregularities, the election results were declared null and void, and Mr. Landsman retained his position as steward until a new election could be held.
On February 13, 1996, in a letter addressed to “Brother Teamsters,” the protester resigned his position as Hadley job steward. Mr. Landsman placed copies of the letter on two bulletin boards at Hadley and sent one copy to Mr. Buck and another to Hadley. The thrust of
Mr. Landsman’s letter states that he is resigning due to irregularities in the earlier steward election. At the end of the letter, Mr. Landsman states, “I have been assured by Jim Buck . . . that if I resign there will be a fair election held. Therefore, I resign . . .”
Later that same day, Mr. Buck responded to Mr. Hadley’s letter. In the letter, he accepted Mr. Landsman’s resignation, denied having ever issued an “if you resign” ultimatum and implied that Mr. Landsman may have been involved in the fraud uncovered during the trusteeship.
On February 15, Mr. Buck posted his letter next to Mr. Landsman’s letter on the same bulletin boards. On February 18, Mr. Landsman attended Local Union 988’s regular monthly meeting at the union hall. Addressing the membership, he read the two letters as well as the protest filed with the Election Officer.
The Election Officer’s jurisdiction is limited to the delegate, alternate delegate and International officer elections. While Mr. Landsman is a candidate for delegate in the Local Union 988 elections, he has presented no evidence demonstrating that Mr. Buck’s response was intended to affect the local union delegate and alternate elections or to negatively impact
Mr. Landsman’s candidacy.
Even assuming that Mr. Buck’s response impacted the delegate elections or
Mr. Landsman’s candidacy, the Election Officer finds that the Rules were not violated.
Mr. Buck in his letter responded to specific allegations contained in Mr. Landsman’s letter pertaining to the administration of the trusteeship. Mr. Buck repeated Mr. Landsman’s allegations but “did not engage in ad hominem attacks” on him as a candidate. In re: Sullivan, 95 - Elec. App. - 2 (KC) (July 14, 1995). Moreover, Mr. Buck had “the right to defend himself from allegations of serious misconduct.” Id.
In consideration of the foregoing, Mr. Landsman’s protest is DENIED.
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:
Tom Landsman
March 12, 1996
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,
Barbara Zack Quindel
Election Officer
cc: Kenneth Conboy, Election Appeals Master
Dolores Hall, Regional Coordinator