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


for the



IN RE: SAMUEL BUCALO,                      )           Protest Decision 2021 ESD 39

                                                                        )           Issued: January 7, 2021

Protestor.                                           )           OES Case No. P-045-010421-ME



Samuel Bucalo, a member of Local Union 100, filed a pre-election protest pursuant to Article XIII, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the 2020-2021 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”).  The protest alleged that leadership of Local Union 100 will limit attendance at the upcoming local union general membership meeting to members in good standing and will use that meeting for an improper campaign purpose.


Election Supervisor representative Dan Walsh investigated this protest.


Findings of Fact and Analysis


This is the second protest Bucalo has filed on the same issue.  In the protest we decided in Bucalo, 2020 ESD 20 (September 18, 2020), Bucalo asserted that the local union violated the Rules by barring him from attending the September 2020 general membership meeting.  In that protest, Bucalo, who conceded then and concedes now he is not a member in good standing, asserted without evidence that the local union membership list used to check membership status for persons seeking entry to the meeting was also used for an improper campaign purpose.  He also asserted that barring persons from the meeting who were not members in good standing impeded the ability of those persons from acquiring information about the local union’s business that could be used in the upcoming delegates and alternate delegates election. 


We denied the protest, concluding that Bucalo’s right to attend the local union general membership meeting, if he had one, relied not on the Rules but on the local union bylaws or the IBT constitution.  We have jurisdiction to enforce the Rules but have no authority to enforce bylaws and IBT constitutional provisions that are unrelated to the Rules.  We further found no proof that the membership list used to check membership status of those persons seeking entry to the meeting was or would be used for an improper campaign purpose.


The instant protest concerns the general membership meeting scheduled to occur today, January 7, 2021, the first such meeting to be held since the September 2020 meeting.  Nominations for local union delegates and alternate delegates will not occur at this meeting; rather, they will occur at the nominations meeting scheduled for February 4, 2021.  The protest here alleged that limiting admission to today’s meeting solely to members in good standing violates the Rules because local union officials will use the meeting to campaign for delegate or alternate delegate.  Article VII, Section 5(a) prohibits campaigning at union meetings unless advance written notice is given to all candidates at least five days prior to the meeting that campaigning will be permitted.  No such notice has been given.  Therefore, campaigning may not permissibly occur.  Further, Local Union 100 president Bill Davis denies that campaigning will be permitted at the meeting.  Accordingly, we reject this allegation.


The protest also alleges that denying attendance at the meeting to persons who are not members in good standing will deprive those persons of information about local union finances and the performance of local union staff on grievances, contract negotiations, and other business of the local union.  While the Rules declare that “[n]o candidate may be denied access to any meeting of the Local Union to which he/she belongs as a member,” Article VII, Section 5(a)(1), Bucalo’s allegation here does not state a claim that the Rules can remedy because he is not a candidate.  Accordingly, we reject this allegation as well.


For these reasons, 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.  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


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 39









Bradley T. Raymond, General Counsel

International Brotherhood of Teamsters


Edward Gleason


Patrick Szymanski


Will Bloom


Tom Geoghegan


Rob Colone


Barbara Harvey


Kevin Moore


F.C. “Chris” Silvera


Fred Zuckerman


Ken Paff

Teamsters for a Democratic Union

Sam Bucalo


Teamsters Local Union 100


Dan Walsh


Jeffrey Ellison