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









January 5, 1996




Jerry Halberg

7903 S. 124th Street

Seattle, WA 98178


Robert Hasegawa, Secretary-Treasurer

Teamster Local Union 174

553 John Street

Seattle, WA 98109


Re: Election Office Case No. P-263-LU174-PNW




A pre-election protest was filed pursuant to Article XIV, Section 2 (b) of the Rules for the 1995-1996 International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”) by Jerry Halberg, a member of Local Union 174.   Mr. Halberg alleges that Robert Hasegawa, secretary-treasurer of Local Union 174, threatened retaliation when he suggested during collective bargaining that any appointed business agent should be fired for participating in the election as a candidate for delegate on any slate which opposes his.


The protest was investigated by Regional Coordinator Christine M. Mrak.


Local Union 174 business agents are appointed to their positions by the presiding secretary-treasurer.  They are represented for purposes of collective bargaining by the Laborers District Council (“LDC”).   Prior to the events which gave rise to this protest, the collective bargaining agreement covering the business agents and existing between Local Union 174 and the LDC expired.  Bargaining sessions for the purpose of obtaining a new collective bargaining agreement commenced in March and were successfully concluded in August, 1995.  At these collective bargaining negotiations, Mr. Hasegawa and staff member Mike Lasslett represented Local Union 174.  Business Agents Mike Wilson and Gary Schmidt, together with their union representative Paul McNeil, represented the bargaining unit.


Jerry Halberg

January 5, 1996

Page 1



During a July, 1995 negotiating session, the content of the “just cause” provision was discussed.  The parties agreed that it should be considered “just cause” to terminate any business agent who became a candidate, in a local union election, for the position of secretary-treasurer.   During the discussion of this proposal, Mr. Hasegawa suggested that a business agent who participates in the delegate election as a candidate on any slate but that of the incumbent secretary-treasurer should also be considered subject to termination for “just cause.”  Mr. McNeil did not agree.  No proposals for specific contract language were offered and no agreement on the issue was reached.  The matter was simply dropped.  Mr. McNeil characterized the interchange as “just kicking around what ifs.”


Local Union 174's nomination meeting for its delegate positions is scheduled for January 11, 1996, a full six months from the time the proposal was raised.  Subsequent to the filing of this protest, Mr. Hasegawa directed his staff supervisor to announce that all business agents are free to run for delegate and alternate delegate without fear of retaliation.  That announcement was made.  On January 5, 1996, Mr. Hasegawa, confirmed by letter to each business agent their right under the Rules to participate in all articles related to the 1996 International officer and delegate elections, including the right to run for a delegate position.


The Rules at Article VIII, Section 11(f), prohibit election related retaliation or threat of retaliation by any subordinate body or member of the IBT against any “Union member, officer or employee.”  Here, the proposal by Mr. Hasegawa was made during collective bargaining negotiations.  The proposal was rejected and did not form the basis for any collective bargaining agreement provision.  Moreover, Mr. Hasegawa has subsequently announced and confirmed by letter, the right of the business agents to run for delegate and openly support any candidate.


Based on the foregoing, the protest is deemed RESOLVED.


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 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:


Kenneth Conboy, Esq.

Latham & Watkins

885 Third Avenue, Suite 1000

New York, NY 10022

Fax (212) 751-4864

Jerry Halberg

January 5, 1996

Page 1



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.






Barbara Zack Quindel

Election Officer




cc:              Kenneth Conboy, Election Appeals Master

Christine Mrak, Regional Coordinator