April 11, 1996
VIA UPS OVERNIGHT
Rich Hray
1948 Marlboro Lane #101
Crest Hill, IL 60435
Daniel Stefanski, Secretary-Treasurer
Teamsters Local Union 726
300 S. Ashland Avenue, Room 206
Chicago, IL 60607
Re: Election Office Case No. P-643-LU726-CHI
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 Rich Hray, a member of Local Union 726.[1] Mr. Hray alleges that Daniel Stefanski, secretary-treasurer of Local Union 726 and a candidate for delegate on the Fair and Equity slate, on March 11, 1996, engaged in prohibited campaigning on an employer’s facility. The protester also alleges that John Lyons, a member of the local union and a steward at Alsip Yard told Mr. Hray that wearing caps and clothing with the Hoffa/Hogan insignia at Alsip Yard is prohibited.
In response, Mr. Stefanski states that he did not campaign at Alsip Yard on the date alleged. Mr. Lyons denies having told the protester that the wearing of campaign paraphernalia is prohibited.
Rich Hray
April 11, 1996
Page 1
This protest was investigated by Regional Coordinator Julie Hamos.
Alsip Yard is a maintenance yard maintained by the Illinois Department of Transportation. The employees have no direct contact with the public and are permitted to wear campaign paraphernalia. The essence of Mr. Hray’s protest, as related to the Regional Coordinator, is that delegates and members campaigning on behalf of the Hoffa/Hogan ‘96 slate have not been given equal campaign access to the employer’s premises. Pro-Hoffa/Hogan campaign material is thrown out, he states, and members who attempt to campaign at the facility are “harassed,” told not to come onto the employer’s property and are “treated like garbage.”
Article VIII, Section 11(d) of the Rules provides that “no restrictions shall be placed upon candidates’ or members’ preexisting rights to solicit support, distribute leaflets or literature . . . or engage in similar activities on employer . . . premises. Such facilities and opportunities shall be made available to all candidates and members on a nondiscriminatory basis.”
When questioned regarding his protest, Mr. Hray admitted that he did not know and could not identify Mr. Stefanski. The protester presented no evidence to substantiate the allegation that Mr. Stefanski impermissibly campaigned. Further, there is no evidence that
Mr. Hray or other members have been denied the right to campaign at the Alsip Yard facility. Mr. Lyons vehemently denies ever telling Mr. Hray that pro-Hoffa members could not campaign at the facility. He states that literature has been distributed by supporters of both Mr. Hoffa and Mr. Carey, both candidates for general president. The Election Officer credits Mr. Lyons, given the lack of evidence presented by Mr. Hray. There is no evidence of discriminatory access.
In consideration of the foregoing, this 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
Rich Hray
April 11, 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 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
Julie Hamos, Regional Coordinator
[1]The protester was a seasonal employee and no longer works for an IBT employer and is not a current member of Local Union 726.