April 3, 1996
VIA UPS OVERNIGHT
Pat Miraglio
April 3, 1996
Page 1
Pat Miraglio, Secretary-Treasurer
Teamsters Local Union 439
1531 E. Fremont Street
Stockton, CA 95201
Mike Parson, Plant Manager
Certified Grocers
1990 Piccoli Road
Stockton, CA 95202
Cor Karaffa, Vice President
Certified Grocers of California, Ltd.
P.O. Box 3396, Terminal Annex
Los Angeles, CA 91151
Pat Miraglio
April 3, 1996
Page 1
Re: Election Office Case Nos. P-650-LU439-CSF,P-666-LU439-CSF
Gentlemen:
Related protests were filed pursuant to Article XIV, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the 1995-1996 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”) by Bruce Blake, a member of Local Union 848, and Pat Miraglio, secretary-treasurer of Local Union 439. In P-650-LU439-CSF, Mr. Blake alleges that campaign material he posted on bulletin boards at a Certified Grocers of California (“Certified”) work site was torn down by Jim Britton, an assistant shop steward, in violation of the Rules. In P-666-LU439-CSF, Mr. Miraglio alleges that Certified violated the Rules by implementing a policy of allowing the posting of candidate literature on bulletin boards at its work sites. Because these protests involve similar issues, they were consolidated for decision by the Election Officer.
In response to Mr. Blake’s allegations, Mr. Britton does not deny tearing down
Mr. Blake’s campaign material. Mr. Britton states that it is the policy of Certified and the local union not to allow any campaign material to be posted. According to Mr. Britton, any posting must first be approved by a union officer.
The protest was investigated by Regional Coordinator Matthew D. Ross.
Pat Miraglio
April 3, 1996
Page 1
The Rules, at Article VIII, Section 11(d), state, “No restrictions shall be placed upon candidates’ or members’ preexisting rights to use employer or Union bulletin boards for campaign publicity.”
On March 19, 1996, Mr. Blake arrived at the Certified warehouse in Stockton, California and posted campaign literature, on behalf of Ron Carey’s campaign, on the union bulletin board in a break room. Mr. Britton told Mr. Blake that only material approved by the local union could be posted. Mr. Blake then left the room for a short time and returned. He then discovered that the literature that he had posted had been torn down and campaign materials he had left on a table or chair had been thrown away. At that time, Mr. Blake gave Mr. Britton a notice from Cor Karaffa, vice president for distribution at Certified, in which Certified announced a new policy allowing members to post campaign materials on union bulletin boards at Certified work sites. Under the old policy, no such materials had been permitted. Mr. Britton states that he threw this notice over his shoulder.
On March 21, 1996, the manager of the Stockton facility contacted Mr. Miraglio at the local union and provided him with a copy of Mr. Karaffa’s notice.
These facts indicate that in removing the literature from the bulletin board, Mr. Britton reasonably relied on the then-existing employer and local union policies. While Mr. Blake did attempt to show Mr. Britton the notice indicating that the employer’s policy had changed,
Mr. Britton had received no information through official channels to put him on notice as to this policy change.
In addition, no evidence has been presented to indicate that union members working at Certified’s Stockton facility previously had a right to post non-official literature or notices on the break-room bulletin board. As a result, the policy which prohibited the posting of campaign material did not violate the Rules and Mr. Britton did not violate the Rules by upholding it.
Since the protested incident, however, Certified has informed Mr. Britton and other Certified work sites throughout California of its policy permitting campaign material to be posted. In P-666, Mr. Miraglio claims that this expansion of Certified’s policy to workplaces within his local union’s jurisdiction constitutes a violation of Local Union 439’s collective bargaining agreement with Certified.
Such a claim, if supported, would place Certified in an untenable position. On January 10, 1996, the Election Officer issued her decision in Rodriguez, P-241-LU630-CLA. In that case, the Election Officer found that union members working at Certified’s facility in Los Angeles had a pre-existing right to post non-official material. As a result, the Election Officer ruled that Certified violated the Rules when it prevented the posting of campaign material at that facility, even though the company’s collective bargaining agreement stated that posting was restricted to official business of the local union. Certified was ordered to allow the postings and to post a notice, signed by the plant manager, at the facility in which it stated that workers had a right to make such postings.
Pat Miraglio
April 3, 1996
Page 1
After this decision was issued, Certified issued a new notice that was identical to the original except that it was signed by Mr. Karaffa. At his instruction, the new notice was to be posted at Certified work sites throughout California.
Certified was properly complying with both the letter and spirit of the Rules when it undertook these actions. When an employer is confronted with evidence showing that, at least at some of its facilities, a policy has existed of permitting campaign material to be posted on union bulletin boards, despite collective bargaining language to the contrary, it should be permitted to extend this right uniformly without an exhaustive study of the past practice at each facility. The Rules encourage the broadest possible means of disseminating campaign messages which do not disrupt employer operations. Bulletin boards are especially well-suited to this purpose. The Election Officer will not limit Certified’s ability to enforce bulletin board access at all of its California facilities as it supports the Consent Order’s goal of a free, open and informed election process.
For the foregoing reasons, these protests are 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
Matthew D. Ross, Regional Coordinator