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

ELECTION APPEALS MASTER
IN RE: JAMES LARSON, JR., Protestor.
11 Elec. App. 21 (KC)

ORDER

This matter is an appeal from the Election Supervisor's decision 2011 EAD 99 issued February 5, 2011. The appeal was submitted by James Larson, a member of Local Union 320 and candidate for alternate delegate.

A hearing was held before me on February 18, 2011. The following persons were heard by way of teleconference: Jeffrey J. Ellison, Esq., for the Election Supervisor and Sue Mauren, Secretary-Treasurer of Local Union 320. James Larson, the protester, appeared at the hearing in person.

Mr. Larson objects to the design of Local 320's Official Ballot for election of convention delegates and alternate delegates. Because his slate was composed exclusively of alternate delegate candidates, he objects to the use of a single box check off for each entire slate at the top of the ballot listing for that slate. His principle rival slates listed candidates for both delegate and alternate delegate separately by office sought.

Mr. Larson argues that the ballot should be redesigned to allow separate voting for alternate delegate and delegate candidates.

The Election Supervisor argued in is ruling denying Mr. Larson's protest that the Election Rules would have to be changed to accommodate Mr. Larson's objections. Mr. Larson disagrees, pointing to Article II, Section 10(b) that states "delegate candidates and alternate delegate candidates shall be listed separately.

A plain reading of that section makes it clear that Local 320 is in full compliance with Article II Section 10 of the Election Rules. Delegate candidates and alternate delegate candidates are indeed listed separately by group and place on the ballot.

The proposal for elimination of block slate voting embracing both delegate and alternate candidates should have come long ago when the 2010-2011 Election Rules were circulated for comment. Indeed, the ballots in this election have already been mailed.

Accordingly, the decision of the Election Supervisor is affirmed.

SO ORDERED:

_/s/_______________________
Kenneth Conboy
Election Appeals Master

Dated: February 22, 2011