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

OFFICE OF THE ELECTION SUPERVISOR

for the

INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS

 

IN RE: LOCAL UNION 377                       )           Protest Decision 2020 ESD 23

NOMINATIONS MEETING.                     )           Issued: October 3, 2020

                                                            )           OES Case No. P-033-100220-ME

____________________________________)

 

            On review of the nominations meeting results for Local Union 377’s delegates and alternate delegates election, we conducted an investigation of the validity of a nomination for alternate delegate made at that meeting.

 

Election Supervisor representative Dan Walsh investigated this matter.

 

Findings of Fact and Analysis

 

            To be eligible to nominate a candidate for delegate or alternate delegate, the nominator or seconder must be a member in good standing, with his/her dues paid through the month prior to the month in which the nominations meeting is conducted.  Local Union 377 held its nominations meeting for the delegate and alternate delegate election on September 16, 2020.  Accordingly, to be eligible to nominate or second a nomination at that meeting, a member was required to be in good standing with his dues paid through August 2020.

 

Local Union 377’s approved election plan permitted the election of three delegates and four alternate delegates.  A total of seven candidates were nominated for these positions; all are members of the local union’s executive board.

 

The nomination of Kenny Sabo for alternate delegate was made by Kenneth Foster.  Foster most often works in the construction industry and is a cash dues payer.  He routinely pays his dues timely, occasionally paying them in advance.  Sabo asked him to make the nomination, and Foster agreed.  Sabo inquired further if Foster was current on his dues; Foster said he was.  Neither requested OES to verify Foster’s eligibility to nominate.  See Rules, Article VI, Section 4(b). 

 

The nominations meeting was chaired by George Faulkner, the local union’s attorney.  Before Faulkner opened the floor for nominations, he read to those assembled the Rules provision that any person nominating or seconding a nomination was eligible to do so only if his/her dues were paid through the month prior to the month of the nominations meeting.  He also read the provision permitting the nomination or seconding for a candidate to be made by more than one person, a provision intended to address the risk that any single nominator or seconder was ineligible to act.

 

During nominations for delegate, two persons seconded the nomination of a particular candidate because of concern that the first person seconding the nomination was ineligible to do so.

 

When nominations opened for alternate delegate, Foster nominated Sabo.  No other person also nominated Sabo.  Another member seconded the nomination of Sabo.  Sabo accepted the nomination.  Other candidates were nominated for the remaining alternate delegate seats.  Faulkner, the presiding official, call three times for further nominations.  None was made, and the nominations meeting was closed.

 

Sabo and Foster both told our investigator that they believed Foster was in good standing at the time the nomination was made, with his dues paid through August 2020.  Sabo stated that he did not arrange for a second nominator because of his belief that Foster was eligible to nominate.

Our examination of Foster’s dues payment history after the meeting showed, however, that he was two months in arrears, with dues paid through June 2020 at the time of the meeting.  At our investigator’s request, Foster reviewed his dues receipts and concluded he had missed two months’ payments of dues through inadvertence.

 

On these facts, we find Foster was ineligible to nominate Sabo.  There being no other nominator for Sabo, his nomination – and election, in this otherwise uncontested election – failed for lack of a valid nomination.

 

As a result of this determination, Local Union 377’s delegation to the IBT convention will consist of three delegates and three alternate delegates only, even though the approved election plan for the local union permitted election of four alternate delegates.  Consistent with this holding, we order the local union to do the following, within three working days of the date this decision issues:

 

  1. Local Union 377 shall prepare and post an amended Notice of Nominations Meeting Results on all worksite bulletin boards that lists as elected only the three candidates validly nominated for delegate and the three candidates validly nominated for delegate, with Sabo’s name removed from the list of elected candidates. 
  2. Local Union 377 shall amend the ranking of alternate delegates previously established to remove Sabo’s name; the order of ranking of the remaining alternate delegates shall otherwise remain as established. 
  3. Local Union 377 shall add this decision to the minutes of the nominations meeting. 

 

Within two working days of complying with the foregoing order, Local Union 377 shall submit a declaration demonstrating such compliance.

 

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.  Any party requesting a hearing must comply with the requirements of Article XIII, Section 2(i).  All parties are reminded that, absent extraordinary circumstances, no party may rely in any such appeal upon evidence that was not presented to the Office of the Election Supervisor.  Requests for a hearing shall be made in writing, shall specify the basis for the appeal, and shall be served upon:

 

Barbara Jones

Election Appeals Master

IBTappealsmaster@bracewell.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, all within the time prescribed above.  Service may be accomplished by email, using the “reply all” function on the email by which the party received this decision.  A copy of the protest must accompany the request for hearing.

 

                                                                  Richard W. Mark

                                                                  Election Supervisor

cc:        Barbara Jones

            2020 ESD 23

 

 

 

 

                                                                                                     

     


DISTRIBUTION LIST (BY EMAIL UNLESS NOTED):

 


Bradley T. Raymond, General Counsel

International Brotherhood of Teamsters

braymond@teamster.org

 

Edward Gleason

egleason@gleasonlawdc.com

 

Patrick Szymanski

szymanskip@me.com

 

Will Bloom

wbloom@dsgchicago.com

 

Tom Geoghegan

tgeoghegan@dsgchicago.com

 

Rob Colone

rmcolone@hotmail.com

 

Barbara Harvey

blmharvey@sbcglobal.net

 

Kevin Moore

Mooregp2021@gmail.com

 

F.C. “Chris” Silvera

fitzverity@aol.com

 

Fred Zuckerman

fredzuckerman@aol.com

 

Ken Paff

Teamsters for a Democratic Union

ken@tdu.org


Kenny Sabo

Kenny.sabo@gmail.com

 

Ralph Sam Cook

Samcook618@hotmail.com

 

George Faulkner

faulkner@fhplaw.com

 

Dan Walsh

dwalsh@ibtvote.org

 

Jeffrey Ellison

EllisonEsq@gmail.com