This website uses cookies.
Office of the Election Supervisor for the International Brotherhood of Teamsters

06 Elec. App. 017 (KC)


This matter is an appeal from the Election Supervisor's decision 2006 ESD 112 issued February 27, 2006.

A hearing was held before me on March 7, 2006. The following persons were heard by way of teleconference: Jeffrey J. Ellison, Esq. and Steven Newmark, Esq. on behalf of the Election Supervisor, Arden D'Amico, Treasurer of Team 639 Slate on behalf of Charlene Peete-Jackson, Charlene Peete Jackson, a member of Local Union 639 and J. Griff Morgan, Election Supervisor representative who investigated this protest.

The protester asserts that she was removed from her position as elected shop steward because of her impending candidacy for delegate on an insurgent slate challenging an incumbent slate comprised of local union officers and business agents. The Election Supervisor "found no connection between her removal and her protected activity," Preliminary Submission to the Election Appeals Master dated March 6, 2006 at 1.

The Election Supervisor's decision dated February 27, 2006 makes a convincing case that the Executive Board's determination to remove Ms. Peete-Jackson as shop steward was motivated by asserted misconduct by Ms. Peete-Jackson and was not driven by electoral politics, as claimed by Ms. Peete-Jackson.

During the Hearing, the protester asserted, according to the Election Supervisor for the first time, that business agent Doug Webber had made statements to her indicating a political motivation by the incumbents as playing some part in their decision to remove her. Indeed, in the appeals submission of Arden D'Amico dated March 2, 2006 given in support of the protester, he stated "Webber even told the investigator that he believed that Ratliff was retaliating against Peete-Jackson." The basis for this statement is unclear. The Election Supervisor's investigator, J. Griff Morgan, was asked during the Hearing to consult his notes and advise as to whether he had been told such a thing by Webber. Mr. Morgan indicated in the negative.

Jeffery Ellison, the Election Supervisor's spokesman at the Hearing, made no reference to the aforementioned D'Amico assertion either in his preliminary submission or his oral remarks. At the conclusion of the Hearing, Mr. Ellison asserted that evidence has emerged at the Hearing which he has heard about for the first time, and "comes too late," and urged affirmance.

Mr. D'Amico is directed to submit to the Election Appeals Master within three days of the date of this order a sworn affidavit showing the basis for the statement asserting that "Webber even told the investigator that he believed that Ratliff was retaliating against Peete-Jackson," at point 6, page two of his submission to the Election Appeals Master dated March 2, 2006. If there is no basis, Mr. D'Amico will submit a letter formally withdrawing that statement from the record.

The matter is continued, pending the required submission.

Kenneth Conboy
Election Appeals Master
Dated: March 8, 2006