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

              April 2, 1996





Margaret Peterson

14327 Jicarilla Road

Apple Valley, CA 92307


Randy Cammack, Secretary-Treasurer

Teamsters Local Union 63

379 W. Valley Boulevard

Rialto, CA 92376


Re:  Election Office Case No. P-669-LU63-CLA




A pre-election protest was filed pursuant to Article XIV, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election ("Rules") by Margaret Peterson, a member of Local Union 63 and candidate for delegate on the People Not Politics slate. 

Ms. Peterson contends that Local Union 63 did not meet its obligations under the Rules with respect to furnishing her with an accurate work-site list, which put her slate at a disadvantage compared to the opposing Cammack-Molina Delegates For Carey slate, headed by Local Union 63 Secretary-Treasurer Randy Cammack.


This protest was investigated by Regional Coordinator Dolly M. Gee.


Ms. Peterson requested a work-site list from Local Union 63 on March 2, 1996.  The local union gave her a list immediately.  However, Mr. Cammack told Ms. Peterson that the list was several months old and that she would receive an updated list within a week. 

Mr. Cammack asked Local Union 63 Executive Secretary Liz Saurez to produce the list, and Ms. Saurez sent it to Ms. Peterson by overnight delivery on March 11.  Ms. Peterson received the updated list on March 12.  On March 12, Ms. Saurez realized that she had not incorporated one employer address change, and she sent that change to Ms. Peterson by letter of that date.

Margaret Peterson

April 2, 1996

Page 1



By letter dated March 21, 1996, Ms. Peterson asked for clarification on two matters.  The updated list showed two Willig Freight facilities no longer in business, one of which a member of Ms. Petersons slate visited and discovered closed.  Local Union 63 admits this mistake.  The other matter was the deletion of an employer called Road Systems, which appeared on the first list furnished to Ms. Peterson.  That deletion was not a mistake.  The company is no longer in business in Local Union 63s area.


Ms. Petersons March 21 letter also requested a campaign mailing, which

Mr. Cammack called her about shortly after receiving it.  Mr. Cammack thinks he answered Ms. Peterson's questions about the work-site list on that phone call but is not sure. 

Ms. Peterson contends that they did not discuss the matter.  On March 26, 1996,

Mr. Cammack responded by letter to Ms. Peterson with respect to mailing arrangements and the work-site list questions.  Ms. Peterson had filed this protest the day before.


To the extent that the protester alleges a violation with respect to a delay in providing her with an updated work-site list, the protest is not timely.  Article XIV, Section 2(b) of the Rules requires members to file protests within two (2) working days of the day when the protestor becomes aware or reasonably should have become aware of the action protested or such protest shall be waived.  Ms. Peterson waited from March 12 to March 25, or nine working days.


The remaining allegation of this protest is that Local Union 63 should have addressed Ms. Petersons questions about the updated list more promptly.  As noted above, the exclusion of Road Systems from the updated list was correct.  Therefore, the only mistake was the inclusion of the two Willig Freight facilities that were in fact closed, which the local union has acknowledged.  The Election Officer finds that this mistake was inadvertent and did not result in withholding from Ms. Peterson any information as to active work sites.  Considering the fact that Ms. Peterson discovered the error and, in essence, only wanted the local union to admit it, the Election Officer does not find that the local unions alleged delay in doing so produced any harm.


Accordingly, 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


Margaret Peterson

April 2, 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.






Barbara Zack Quindel

Election Officer



cc:               Kenneth Conboy, Election Appeals Master

Dolly M. Gee, Regional Coordinator