February 29, 1996
VIA UPS OVERNIGHT
Gerald Gallagher
February 29, 1996
Page 1
Gerald Gallagher
5078 Williamson
Dearborn, MI 48126
United Parcel Service
Corporate Headquarters
5500 Glenlake Parkway
Atlanta, GA 30328
Jim Cianciolo, President
Teamsters Local Union 243
2741 Trumbull Avenue
Detroit, MI 48216
Martin Wald
Schnader, Harrison, Segal & Lewis
1600 Market Street, Suite 3600
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Gerald Gallagher
February 29, 1996
Page 1
Re: Election Office Case No. P-441-LU243-MGN
Gentlemen:
A pre-election protest was filed pursuant to Article XIV, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the 1995-1996 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”) by Gerald Gallagher, a member of Local Union 243 and an employee of the United Parcel Service (“UPS”) in its Delivery Information Center (“DIC”) in Livonia, Michigan. Mr. Gallagher alleges that collusion between Local Union 243 and UPS with respect to closing the Livonia DIC, and the uncertainty about the future employment status of these employees, adversely affected the ability of DIC employees to participate in the delegate nomination process. In particular, Mr. Gallagher suggests that he may have been restrained in his own ability to join a delegate slate, because his uncertain employment status would put the entire slate at risk.
This protest was investigated by Regional Coordinator William A. Wertheimer.
Gerald Gallagher
February 29, 1996
Page 1
Mr. Gallagher bases his protest on the alleged difference in the way UPS DIC closing announcements were handled for the Livonia DIC and the UPS DIC in Cleveland. Mr. Gallagher states that the announcement with respect to the Cleveland DIC was accompanied by an announcement that UPS expected no lay-offs for affected employees. In the case of the Livonia DIC, he alleges: (1) that the announcement was made about 10 days after the Cleveland DIC announcement; (2) that the announcement closely preceded the Local Union 243 nomination meeting; and (3) that it included no information on the future job status of affected employees. Mr. Gallagher speculates that the decisions to close the Cleveland and Livonia DICs were made at the same time and concludes that the difference in the treatment of the announcements resulted from collusion between Local Union 243 and UPS in order to impair the ability of Livonia DIC employees to participate in the election process.
UPS states that closing the Livonia DIC is part of a nationwide effort to consolidate its customer service telephone centers. It further states that it has communicated with the Interna-tional Union concerning this consolidation for months and that there is no relationship between the consolidation and the delegate election in Local Union 243.
Local Union 243 states that UPS first announced its consolidation plan in March 1995. In September 1995, the IBT granted authority to affected local unions to bargain locally with UPS with respect to the closings, and Local Union 243 negotiated with UPS in October and December of 1995 and three times in February of 1996. Local Union 243 states that it has held numerous meetings with members to discuss the proposed closings. It further states that
Mr. Gallagher has not attended any of those meetings.
The Election Officer finds that there is no evidence in this record showing collusion between Local Union 243 and UPS to create uncertainty with respect to future employment status at the Livonia DIC and thereby affect the willingness or ability of members at that work site to participate in the election. See Chentnik, Case No. P-112-LU579-NCE (August 22, 1995), aff’d, 95 - Elec. App. - 13 (KC) (September 20, 1995) (investigation showed employer justification for work site closing and no current evidence of collusion with local union in an effort to affect the delegate election).
The Election Officer also notes that one of the Local Union 243 stewards involved in the bargaining with UPS, Gerald O’Donohue, is a Livonia DIC employee and is participating in the election on a slate running against incumbents. With respect to Mr. Gallagher’s statement that he may have felt restrained from joining a slate for fear that his uncertain employment status would put the entire slate at risk, Article IX, Section 1(d) of the Rules provides that “[s]hould one or more members of a slate be found ineligible to run, such ineligibility shall not affect the eligibility of remaining members of the slate.”
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 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:
Gerald Gallagher
February 29, 1996
Page 1
Kenneth Conboy, Esq.
Latham & Watkins
885 Third Avenue, Suite 1000
New York, NY 10022
Fax (212) 751-4864
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
William A. Wertheimer, Jr., Regional Coordinator