September 27, 1995
VIA UPS OVERNIGHT
George Young
26727 W. 276
Spring Hill, KS 66083
Philip E. Young, President
Teamsters Local Union 41
4501 Van Brunt Blvd.
Kansas City, MO 64130
Re: Election Office Case No. P-045-LU41-EOH
Gentlemen:
A pre-election protest was filed pursuant to Article XIV, Section 2 (a) of the Rules for the 1995-1996 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”) by George Young, a member of Local Union 41.[1] The protester contends that Local 41 News, a newspaper published by Local Union 391, has improperly opposed the candidacy of General President Ron Carey. The protester does not cite a specific issue of or article in the protested publication. The protester contends that the publication was used "to attack Carey and the defeated dues hike."
George Young
September 27, 1995
Page 1
Election Office Staff Attorney Helene Boetticher investigated the protest.
The investigation disclosed that Local 41 News was published and distributed by Local Union 41 from January to April of 1994. Thereafter, a column entitled "Local 41 News" was published in The Labor Times, an independently published newspaper that reports on matters of interest to labor unions in the Kansas City area. The Election Officer has previously determined that the publication of The Labor Times, from the time when the "Local 41 News" column appeared to the time of the instant protest, did not constitute an attack on the candidacy of Mr. Carey in violation of the Rules. Sauwoir, P-041-LU41-EOH et seq. As a result, the scope of the current decision of the Election Officer will be restricted to a consideration of those issues of Local 41 News published and distributed by the Local Union.
The Rules, at Article VIII, Section 8(a), provide the following prohibition, “No publication or communication financed, directly or indirectly, by a Union may be used to support or attack any candidate or the candidacy of any person, except as authorized by Sections 8 and 9 of this Article. . .” Section 8(a) also sets forth specific illustrations of improper support by a union-financed publication.
In determining whether a union-financed publication violates this prohibition, the Election Officer must first determine if the subject of the communication was a candidate when the communication was made. See Ruscigno, P-067-LU20-EOH (July 19, 1995), Martin,
et al., P-010-IBT-PNJ, et seq. (August 17, 1995).
The investigation disclosed that the Local Union published and distributed only two issues of Local 41 News before the publication was discontinued in favor of the column in The Labor Times. Both of these issues were published prior to May 1994.
The Election Officer has previously determined that Mr. Carey was not a candidate when the January/February 1994 and March/April 1994 issues of Local 41 News were published. See Martin, supra. Consequently, material printed in these issues could not have attacked Mr. Carey’s candidacy in violation of the Rules.
For the foregoing reasons, the protest is DENIED.
Any interested party not satisfied with this determination may request a hearing before the Election Appeals Master within one day of receipt of this letter. The parties are reminded that, absent extraordinary circumstances, no party may rely upon evidence that was not presented by the party to the Office of the Election Officer in any such appeal. Requests for a hearing shall be made in writing and shall be served on:
George Young
September 27, 1995
Page 1
Kenneth Conboy, Esq.
Mudge, Rose, Guthrie, Alexander & Ferdon
180 Maiden Lane, 36th Floor
New York, NY 10038
Fax (212) 248-2655
Copies of the request for hearing must be served on the parties listed above as well as upon the Election Officer, 400 North Capitol Street, Suite 855, Washington, D.C. 20001, Facsimile (202) 624-3525. A copy of the protest must accompany the request for a hearing.
Sincerely,
Barbara Zack Quindel
Election Officer
cc: Kenneth Conboy, Election Appeals Master
Michael D. Gordon, Regional Coordinator
[1]This “reach-back” protest was filed within the 30-day period following the final promulgation of the Rules on April 24, 1995, and alleges violations occurring prior to the issuance of the Rules. The Rules, at Article XIV, Section 2(a), state:
Protests regarding violations of the [Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act, as amended] (including violations of the IBT Constitution) allegedly occurring prior to the date of issuance of the Rules and protests regarding any conduct allegedly occurring within the first twenty-eight (28) days after issuance of the Rules must be filed within thirty (30) days of the date of issuance, or such protests shall be waived.