Protest Decisions

ELECTION APPEALS MASTER

FOR THE INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS

            Protest Decision 2021 ESD 174 (ESD 174), which addresses a pre-election protest filed by Jeff Norris and Michael Johnson, was issued on November 4, 2021 (OES Case No. P-184-101221-SO) by the Election Supervisor.  The protest alleged that Frank Perkins, principal officer of Local Union 657, permitted a sergeant-at-arms to distribute campaign material during a local union membership meeting in violation of the Rules for the 2020-2021 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (the “Rules”).

On November 4th, the Election Supervisor found that Mr. Perkins had not violated the Rules and denied the protest.  On November 5, 2021, Mr. Norris and Mr. Johnson appealed the decision.  On November 7, 2021, the Election Supervisor superseded and replaced ESD 174 with Protest Decision 2021 ESD 177 (ESD 177), and denied the protest again.  On November 9, 2021, Mr. Johnson and Mr. Norris appealed ESD 177.    

On November 9, 2021, by Notice of Hearing, the Election Appeals Master scheduled a telephonic hearing for November 16, 2021.  On November 15, 2021, the Office of Election Supervisor and the Protestors submitted supplemental written arguments in support of their respective positions.    
        

A telephonic hearing was held on November 16, 2021.  The following individuals attended the hearing:  Jeffrey J. Ellison, Esq. on behalf of the Office of the Election Supervisor; Jeff Norris and Michael Johnson, on behalf of themselves; Frank Perkins, on behalf of Local 657; and Victor Casillas, a shop steward for Local Union 657.

Decision of the Election Appeals Master

            On October 10, 2021, Local Union 657 held a general membership meeting for members, which was presided over by Frank Perkins, the local’s principal officer.  At the commencement of the meeting, Victor Casillas began distributing partisan campaign flyers to members seated in the back row of the meeting hall.  Mr. Perkins was immediately made aware that campaign literature was being disseminated and, in front of all the members, ordered Mr. Casillas to cease from doing so.  Mr. Perkins also explained to the membership that handing out campaign material during the meeting was prohibited.  Based on Mr. Perkins’ instructions, Mr. Casillas stopped handing out the campaign material and collected the flyers that he had previously handed out.  The flyers were only given to members seated in the back row of the meeting.

Article VII, Section 5(a)(3) of the Rules states that, “[t]he Local Union need not allot time for campaigning during any of its meetings.  However, if campaigning during such meetings is permitted, the Local Union shall notify all candidates for the positions for which such campaigning will be permitted of the opportunity to speak at least five (5) days prior to the meeting and shall divide the time equally between those candidates (or candidates' credentialed representatives) who request an opportunity to speak.” 

Appellants claim that the distribution of the campaign material violated Article VII, Section 5(a)(3).  However, it is clear from the record that Local Union 657 did not permit or otherwise condone any campaigning during the meeting.  Mr. Perkins ordered Mr. Casillas to stop handing out the campaign literature.  Mr. Casillas then immediately collected the flyers from the members that he had given them to.[1]  Mr. Perkins also explained to the membership that campaigning during the meeting was prohibited.  Based on these facts, the Election Supervisor correctly concluded that the Rules had not been violated.

For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is DENIED.
 

SO ORDERED,

Hon. Barbara S. Jones (Ret.)

Election Appeals Master

DATED:         November 22, 2021



DISTRIBUTION LIST (VIA EMAIL):