Protest Decisions

OFFICE OF THE ELECTION SUPERVISOR

for the

INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS

IN RE: DAVID FROELICH,                      )           Protest Decision 2016 ESD 84

                                                                        )           Issued: January 25, 2016

            Protestor.                                           )           OES Case No. P-075-010516-CA     

____________________________________)

            David Froelich, member, officer, and delegate candidate in Local Union 987, 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 Bob Brunet was not validly nominated because the member seconding his nomination was ineligible to do so.

            Election Supervisor representative Jack Sullens investigated this protest.

Findings of Fact and Analysis

Article II, Section 5(h) of the Rules provides that a member is eligible to nominate another member for delegate or alternate, or to second that nomination, if the nominating or seconding member has “his/her dues paid through the month prior to the nominations meeting.” 

The nominations meeting for Local Union 987’s delegates and alternate delegates election was held January 5, 2016.  Therefore, nominators and seconders were required to be paid through December 2015 in order to be eligible to nominate or second.

The protest alleged that Rick Chaulk was ineligible to second the nomination of Bob Brunet. To verify Chaulk’s eligibility, we reviewed the TITAN record for dues remitted on his behalf.  Chaulk’s TITAN shows that he was a check-off dues payer employed by Purolator.  The TITAN report drawn on January 5, 2016, the date of the nominations meeting, showed that the last monthly dues recorded to Chaulk’s record were posted on December 16, 2015, which paid him through November 2015.  A TITAN report drawn January 22, 2016 showed dues posted to Chaulk’s record on January 11, 2016, which paid him through December 2015.  Evidence demonstrates that the dues Purolator deducts from members’ earnings in a given month are remitted and posted to members’ dues records in the subsequent month, therefore the dues posted to Chaulk’s record in January 2016 were deducted from his wages in December 2015.

It is well-established in our precedents that a member on dues check-off retains his good standing even if his dues were remitted late or not at all by the employer, provided he had signed a check-off authorization and had sufficient earnings or paid leave in the month from which dues could have been deducted.  IBT Constitution, Article X, Section 5(c); Eligibility of John Gerow, et al., 2006 ESD 121 (March 2, 2006); Eligibility of Thiel, 2010 ESD 16 (July 26, 2010), appeal withdrawn, 10 EAM 4 (August 6, 2010); Eligibility of Montes, 2011 ESD 114 (February 16, 2011).  This rule operates to protect Chaulk’s good standing for December 2015 and his eligibility to second the nomination of Brunet.

            The protestor contends that Chaulk’s TITAN record is wrong, that he had no dues deducted in November or December 2014 or January 2015 and his dues history should have shown an arrearage of three months.  The TITAN record does not show such an arrearage, but Chaulk would have been eligible to second Brunet’s nomination even if it did.  The protest concedes that Chaulk had wages from which dues could be deducted in November 2014 and January 2015; further, two holidays fell during December 2014 from which dues could have been deducted.  Under the check-off rule cited above, Chaulk was entitled to rely on the check-off authorization he signed in order to maintain good standing for any month in which he had sufficient income from wages or pay from sick leave, vacation leave, or holiday from which the employer could have deducted dues. 

Accordingly, we DENY this protest, find Chaulk ELIGIBLE to second the nomination of Brunet, and therefore find Brunet validly nominated.

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

            2016 ESD 84

DISTRIBUTION LIST (BY EMAIL UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED):