March 5, 1996
VIA UPS OVERNIGHT
John Cetinske, et al.
March 5, 1996
Page 1
John Cetinske
117 Peak Hill Circle
Nashville, TN 37211
Roger Beach
110 Jewell Avenue
Smyrna, TN 37167
Bill Clemens
2507 Spaulding Circle
Murfreesboro, TN 37129
Lou Quintano
107 Springfield Drive
Smyrna, TN 37167
Ronnie Martin
4741 Stewart’s Ferry Pike
Mt. Juliet, TN 37122
Ronnie Martin #480 Slate
4741 Stewart’s Ferry Pike
Mt. Juliet, TN 37122
John Cetinske, et al.
March 5, 1996
Page 1
Re: Election Office Case No. P-506-LU480-SCE
Gentlemen:
The 480 Rank & File Experienced slate of candidates for delegate from Local Union 480 filed a protest pursuant to Article XIV, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the 1995-1996 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”) against Ronnie Martin, the principal officer of Local Union 480, and the Ronnie Martin #480 slate of delegate candidates. The protester alleges that Mr. Martin has used the union newsletter, Teamsters Local 480 News, to attack the former officers of Local Union 480 and the Teamsters Local 480 Members’ Choice slate, the slate of candidates for delegate supported by the former officers. The protester also alleges that Mr. Martin is not fit to be a delegate based on the findings and decision of Joint Council No. 87, sustaining challenges to the local union officer election in which Mr. Martin was elected president.
The protest was assigned to Regional Coordinator Bruce Boyens.
John Cetinske, et al.
March 5, 1996
Page 1
The Teamsters Local 480 News is printed on both sides of a single page. Most of the newsletter is devoted to a report from Local Union 480 President Martin entitled, “Let’s Unite to Build Our Local,” in which he describes the condition of the union as found by the new officers, and the goals of the new administration. The president’s report is critical of the former officers’ management of the local union’s finances and their inefficiency in processing grievances and handling benefit issues. There is no mention of the delegate elections or any slate of candidates in this or any other article in the newsletter. A shorter article describes the plans of the new officers to make education and training priorities for their administration. A third article lists the local union’s new business agents and their assignments.
Article VIII, Section 8(a) of the Rules provides 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 . . .”
The newsletter does not refer to the Ronnie Martin #480 slate of delegates, expressly or by implication. While the column from the Local Union 480 president in Teamsters Local 480 News may be critical of the former officers of the local union, at least one of whom is a candidate for delegate, mere criticism, in and of itself, does not rise to the level of campaigning. See Blake, P-245-JC42-CLA (January 12, 1996), aff’d, 96 - Elec. App. - 54 (January 12, 1996). Accordingly, the publication does not violate the Rules.
Article VII, Section 1 sets forth the criteria for eligibility to run for delegate:
(a) To be eligible to run for any Convention delegate, alternate delegate or International Officer position, one must:
(1) Be a member in continuous good standing of the Local Union, with one’s dues paid to the Local Union for a period of twenty-four (24) consecutive months prior to the month of nomination for said position with no interruptions in active membership due to suspensions, expulsions, withdrawals, transfers or failure to pay fines or assessments;
(2) Be 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; and
(3) Be eligible to hold office if elected.
The protester has not raised an issue of eligibility under the Rules with respect to
Mr. Martin’s candidacy.
Mr. Martin’s eligibility to be a candidate for alternate delegate may be affected by a disciplinary penalty if such a penalty interrupted his good standing or rendered him ineligible to serve. Here, however, the protestor has provided no evidence that would disquailfy
John Cetinske, et al.
March 5, 1996
Page 1
Mr. Martin as a candidate under the Rules.
Based on the foregoing, 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:
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.
Sincerely,
Barbara Zack Quindel
Election Officer
cc: Kenneth Conboy, Election Appeals Master
Bruce Boyens, Regional Coordinator