Protest Decisions

OFFICE OF THE ELECTION SUPERVISOR

for the

INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS

IN RE: HOFFA-HALL 2016,                      )           Protest Decision 2015 ESD 57

                                                                        )           Issued: November 25, 2015

            Protestor.                                           )           OES Case No. P-045-090415-NA     

____________________________________)

            Hoffa-Hall 2016 filed a pre-election protest pursuant to Article XIII, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the 2015-2016 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”).  The protest alleged that Teamsters United’s CCER reports for reporting period 1 were deficient in two ways, thereby violating the Rules.

            Election Supervisor representatives Jeffrey Ellison and Terry Flick investigated this protest.

Findings of Fact and Analysis

            All candidates and slates are required to file periodic reports detailing campaign contributions received and campaign expenditures incurred.  Article XI, Section 2(a)(1) & (2).  In addition, independent committees are required to file similar reports in reporting periods in which their financial activity exceeds certain thresholds the Rules dictate.  Article XI, Section 2(a)(3).  The reports each responsible party must file in each applicable period are the Campaign Contribution and Expenditure Report (CCER), and the “Supplemental Form No. 1: Permitted Employer and Labor Organization Contributions and Associated Expenditures for Legal and Accounting Services.” (Supplement No. 1).

            Teamsters United is a slate of candidates for International office.  It timely filed its reports for reporting period 1, covering the dates April 1, 2012 through May 31, 2015.  Hoffa-Hall 2016 filed this protest, alleging that Teamsters United violated the Rules in two instances by under-reporting its receipts and expenditures.  The allegations are addressed in the order they appear in the protest.

            First, the protest asserts that Teamsters United (TU) reported receiving fund transfers from Take Back Our Union (TBOU) in the gross amount of $3,078.92, while TBOU reported that the fund transfers totaled $3,419.92.  The difference in these totals is $341.00, which the protestor asserts is an impermissible under-reporting by TU. 

            Investigation of this alleged discrepancy shows that TBOU made three separate fund transfers to TU, one in the amount of $2,000.00 on March 13, 2015, a second in the amount of $1,078.92 on April 13, 2015, and a third for $341.00, also on April 13, 2015.  The first two transfers, totaling $3,078.92, are reflected in TU’s CCER report of Verified Monetary Contributions. 

The third transfer, for $341.00, was made from TBOU’s legal and accounting fund to TU’s legal and accounting fund.  Investigation shows that this transfer was recorded properly by both parties.  Although the display of the transfer in TU’s supplemental report #1 is not obvious, this is not the fault of TU, which entered the transfer into the CCERS software properly.  The transfer is identified by comparing the Summary page total for Itemized Individual Monetary Contributions of $1,991.00 with the Schedule A-1 total of Individual Monetary Contributions, which attributes $1,650.00 in contributions to three individuals.  The difference between these totals is $341.00.  The $341.00 figure is not recorded as an Individual Monetary Contribution because it was a transfer from the TBOU legal and accounting fund account to the TU legal and accounting fund account.[1]  We have reviewed the transaction detail underlying the transfers and find, on that basis, that TU accounted for all fund transfers from TBOU and that the amounts transferred by TBOU match the amounts TU reported receiving from TBOU.  Accordingly, we find no Rules violation with respect to this allegation.

The protest’s second allegation is that “TU conducted several fundraisers without listing any costs for the events.”  The protest acknowledges that “it is possible to have a zero cost event, but this is unlikely and further, a lack of reporting these costs could reflect in-kind provision of space and services to TU.”

Review of TU’s period 1 CCER report shows seven fundraisers, two of which list “$0.00” in Section F. of the reports on individual fundraisers/events titled “Total cost incurred in conducting the event (including expenditures for building and equipment rentals, copying costs for fliers/announcements, postage, food, entertainment, etc.).”  We discuss these events individually.

The first event occurred March 15, 2015 at a rented hall in Worcester, MA.  TU’s CCER shows that a member paid the rental fee in the amount of $300.00, as well as the additional fee for rental of a sound system in the amount of $154.06.  The hall rental included bartender services, and individual patrons bought their beverages directly from the bartender.  The payments for the hall and sound system were properly listed in the Verified In-Kind Contributions schedule of TU’s CCER; their purpose and the associated event were properly identified in that same schedule of the report.

The second event for which “$0.00” was listed as the total cost of the event occurred May 2, 2015 at TDU’s office.  The event was a meeting of the TDU steering committee.  Several individuals purchased TU merchandise at the committee meeting.  The meeting was not organized or convened as a fundraiser for TU.  Instead, it was at TDU at which TU t-shirts were sold.  The merchandise sales to Teamster members were properly reported in TU’s CCER as Verified Monetary Contributions, listing the contribution as “Sale of Campaign Merchandise” and the event as “TDU/ISC (TDU office).”  The cost in producing campaign merchandise is properly reported in Schedule B, Part I – Itemized Expenditures.

We find that these events and the contributions and expenditures associated with them, if any, were properly reported.

            Accordingly, we DENY this protest.

Any interested party not satisfied with this determination may request a hearing before the Election Appeals Master within two (2) working days of receipt of this decision.  The parties are reminded that, absent extraordinary circumstances, no party may rely upon evidence that was not presented to the Office of the Election Supervisor in any such appeal.  Requests for a hearing shall be made in writing, shall specify the basis for the appeal, and shall be served upon:

Kathleen A. Roberts

Election Appeals Master

JAMS

620 Eighth Avenue, 34^th floor

New York, NY 10018

kroberts@jamsadr.com

Copies of the request for hearing must be served upon the parties, as well as upon the Election Supervisor for the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, 1050 17^th Street, N.W., Suite 375, Washington, D.C. 20036, all within the time prescribed above.  A copy of the protest must accompany the request for hearing.

                                                                        Richard W. Mark

                                                                        Election Supervisor

cc:        Kathleen A. Roberts

            2015 ESD 57 

DISTRIBUTION LIST (BY EMAIL UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED):