November 16, 1998
VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL
David A. Eckstein
November 16, 1998
Page 1
David A. Eckstein
35 E Street, NW, #110
Washington, DC 20001
Tom Sever, Acting General
President/Secretary-Treasurer
Int’l Brotherhood of Teamsters
25 Louisiana Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001
David L. Neigus
Acting General Counsel
Int’l Brotherhood of Teamsters
25 Louisiana Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Joe Selsavage, Director
Accounting Department
Int’l Brotherhood of Teamsters
25 Louisiana Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Tom Leedham Campaign Office
P.O. Box 15877
Washington, DC 20003
Marie Chopra, Esq.
James & Hoffman
1146 19th Street, NW
Washington, DC XXX-XX-XXXX
David A. Eckstein
November 16, 1998
Page 1
Re: Election Office Case No. PR-294-IBT-EOH
Gentlepersons:
David Eckstein, a member of Local Union 661, IBT Director of Field Services, and a candidate for International Trustee on the Tom Leedham Rank and File Power Slate (“Leedham Slate”), 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 Acting General President and General Secretary-Treasurer Tom Sever. Mr. Sever is also a candidate for General Secretary-Treasurer on the John Metz Slate (“Metz Slate”). Mr. Eckstein alleges that Mr. Sever reversed several agreements made earlier in 1998 concerning housing, food and travel in retaliation for his candidacy on the Leedham Slate.
The IBT responds that the actions taken were consistent with long-standing IBT policy, and was to correct an earlier error made in payments to the protester. The IBT maintains that the actions were unconnected to the International Officer Rerun Election and affect all employees.
The protest was investigated by Election Office Staff Attorney Peter F. Gimbrère.
David A. Eckstein
November 16, 1998
Page 1
The protester states that in a meeting in June 1998, attended by the protester and IBT employees Glenn Davis and Doug Webber, IBT Director of Accounting Joe Selsavage presented Messrs. Eckstein, Davis and Webber with two options regarding their time in Washington, DC. Mr. Selsavage told them that either 1) the IBT would provide $1,000 per month as a housing allowance, which would cover all food and lodging or 2) the IBT would pay for housing, food and travel expenses and it would be considered taxable income. The protester states he chose the second option.
On September 2, 1998, Mr. Selsavage wrote a memorandum to all IBT department directors regarding the daily meal allowance. The text of the memorandum read as follows:
It has recently come to my attention that some Department Directors are receiving the $26 daily meal allowance in error. Please be advised that a Department Director is only entitled to receive reimbursement for meals related to International Union business with proper documentation (i.e., receipts, business purpose, etc) and which are approved by the General President’s Office in accordance with the Travel Policy for IBT Headquarters Staff (copy attached). Therefore, the daily meal allowance will no longer by reimbursed to any Department Directors. Any business related meal expenses should be properly documented on your monthly expense report.
The IBT “Travel and Business Related Expense Policies” dated August 1, 1994, states that,
International Headquarters Staff personnel may be called upon to incur business related meal and entertainment charges for others in the performance of their duties. All such meal and entertainment charges must be reasonable in nature and fully documented.
Mr. Selsavage admits he had a conversation with the protester earlier in the year during which he discussed the choice of a $1,000 housing allowance. Mr. Selsavage states that he put Mr. Eckstein’s options in writing (but cannot locate the document) and stated in that document that he could not guarantee the accuracy of the information. Mr. Selsavage admits that at the time of this conversation, he was not aware that Mr. Eckstein was not entitled to a $26 per day meal allowance.
David A. Eckstein
November 16, 1998
Page 1
The IBT became aware that Mr. Selsavage had made an error when Doug Webber, Director of the Carhaul Division, submitted his expense reports for April and May, 1998 in early July, 1998. The expense reports revealed that Mr. Webber was continuing to claim $26 per day meal allowance to which he was previously entitled as an IBT employee, but was not entitled as a division director. Because Mr. Webber was unaware that a different policy applied to him, he had not retained receipts for meal expenses that were business related. To resolve this problem, the IBT agreed to pay Mr. Webber’s meal allowance through June 30, 1998.
During the discussions with Mr. Webber, however, Mr. Selsavage became aware that
Mr. Eckstein was also claiming a $26 per day meal allowance. According to IBT policy, when Mr. Eckstein was appointed director of Field Services in March 1997, he was no longer entitled to the meal allowance. In order to correct this error, Mr. Selsavage states he sent the
September 2, 1998 memorandum to all division directors reminding them of the meal allowance policy effective since August 1994.
Article VIII, Section 11(f) of the Rules provides:
Retaliation or threat of retaliation by the International Union, any subordinate body, any member of the IBT, any employer or other person or entity against a Union member, officer or employee for exercising any right guaranteed by this or any other Article of the Rules is prohibited.
To demonstrate retaliation, a protester must show that conduct protected by the Rules was a motivating factor in the adverse decision or conduct in dispute. The Election Officer will not find retaliation if he concludes that the union officer or entity would have taken the same action even in the absence of the protester’s protected conduct. Gilmartin, P-032-LU245-PNJ
(January 5, 1996), aff’d, 95 - Elec. App. - 75 (KC) (February 6, 1996). See Leal, P-051- IBT-CSF (October 3, 1995), aff’d, 95 - Elec. App. - 30 (KC) (October 30, 1995); Wsol, P-095-IBT-CHI (September 20, 1995), aff’d, 95 - Elec. App. - 17 (KC) (October 10, 1995).
While there is little question that Mr. Selsavage had misadvised the protester, the September 2 memorandum was a decision to correct the earlier error and to reimburse the protester for meals in the same manner as all other staff employed at IBT headquarters. The protester has presented no evidence that he is being treated differently from similarly situated IBT employees. The actions of Mr. Selsavage do not appear to implicate the International Officer Rerun Election.
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:
David A. Eckstein
November 16, 1998
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, 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