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

              March 7, 1996





Joseph Murphy

81 Hamilton Avenue

Leonardo, NJ 07737


Re:  Election Office Case No. P-475-LU560-PNJ


Dear Mr. Murphy:


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 Joe Murphy, a member of Local Union 560.  Mr. Murphy protests the eligibility requirements for convention delegates and alternates as stated in Article VII, Section 1(a)(2) of the Rules.  He states that this requirement unfairly impacts the eligibility of IBT members who have been laid off from work by making them ineligible to run for delegate or alternate. 


This protest was investigated by Regional Coordinator Peter V. Marks, Sr.


Article VII, Section 1(a)(2) of the Rules states that a member must “[b]e employed at the craft within the jurisdiction of the Local Union for a period of twenty-four (24) consecutive months prior to the month of nomination . . .”


Joseph Murphy

March 7, 1996

Page 1



Section 1(a)(2)’s language reflects the eligibility requirements mandated by the IBT’s Constitution.  Article III, Section 5 of the IBT Constitution states that “each elected delegate or alternate must meet the same eligibility requirements are imposed for election to Local Union office.”  Article II, Section 4(a)(1) of the IBT Constitution states, in part, that a member be “actively employed at the craft within the jurisdiction of such Local Union, for a period of twenty-four (24) consecutive months prior to the month of nomination for said office . . .”   Comments on the Rules were solicited from IBT members from December 27, 1994, through March 15, 1995.   The Rules were subsequently approved and adopted by Decision and Order of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Hon. David N. Edelstein), dated August 22, 1995.  Mr. Murphy’s protest is based on a disagreement with the Rules, not an alleged violation.


In consideration of the foregoing, Mr. Murphy’s 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:


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 N. Capitol Street, Suite 855, Washington, DC 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

Peter V. Marks, Sr., Regional Coordinator