April 25, 1996
VIA UPS OVERNIGHT
Margaret Peterson
April 25, 1996
Page 1
Margaret Peterson
14327 Jicarilla Road
Apple Valley, CA 92307
Ed Mireles, President
Teamsters Joint Council 92
140 S. Marks Way, Suite 92
Orange, CA 92668
Cammack/Molina Delegates for Carey
c/o Randy Cammack, Secretary-Treasurer
Teamsters Local Union 63
379 W. Valley Boulevard
Rialto, CA 92376
Margaret Peterson
April 25, 1996
Page 1
Re: Election Office Case No. P-720-LU63-CLA
Gentlepersons:
Margaret Peterson, a member of Local Union 63, filed a pre-election protest pursuant to Article XIV, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the 1995-1996 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”) against Joint Council 92 and its officers, President Ed J. Mireles, Vice President Jack Cox, Secretary-Treasurer and delegate candidate Randy Cammack and Recording Secretary Richard Esquivel. The protest is also filed against the Cammack-Molina Delegates for Carey (“Cammack”) slate from Local Union 63. The protester alleges that Joint Council 92 deliberately delayed mailing its bi-monthly publication, The Members’ Bulletin, in order for it to be delivered to Local Union 63 members at the same time they received a campaign leaflet from the Cammack slate and the ballots in the Local Union 63 delegate election. The protester alleges that Joint Council 92 timed the mailing of its newspaper to promote the Cammack slate, in violation of the Rules.
The protester contends that the March 1996 issue of The Members’ Bulletin promotes the Cammack slate in several respects: (1) she cites a picture on the front page of the newspaper of Jim Minisci, IBT International representative and an article inside the paper about his appointment to acting Western Region freight chairman; (2) she complains that
Margaret Peterson
April 25, 1996
Page 1
Mr. Minisci is featured in The Members’ Bulletin and pictured in a Cammack slate campaign leaflet which was mailed to Local Union 63 members at the same time; (3) she objects to the article on Mr. Minisci’s appointment to acting Western Region freight chairman because the article includes quotes from Mr. Cammack, Mr. Mireles and Mr. Esquivel; and (4) she objects to the article because it mentions General President Ron Carey twice.
The protester also cites an article in the March 1996 The Members’ Bulletin reporting the election of Mr. Cox to the position of delegate from Local Union 572. She complains that the article contains language similar to language contained in the Cammack slate leaflet.
Mr. Cammack, responding on behalf of the Cammack slate, states that the slate had nothing to do with the alleged delay in mailing the March 1996 issue of the Joint Council 92 newspaper. Shed Behar, publisher of The Members’ Bulletin, states that publication of the Joint Council 92 newspaper was delayed in order to find a new unionized printer, not to influence the Local Union 63 delegate election.
Regional Coordinator Dolly M. Gee investigated the protest.
The March 1996 issue of The Members’ Bulletin includes on its cover a picture of
Jim Minisci, secretary-treasurer of Local Union 578 and trustee and coordinator of Joint Council 92, with the headline “Minisci Appointed To Western Freight Position.” An article on page four of the 16-page paper reports that Mr. Carey has appointed Mr. Minisci acting Western Region freight chairman. According to the article, Mr. Minisci’s duties in his new post include the coordination of activities for freight and car haul drivers in the Western Region and the representation of the Western Region on grievance panels.
Mr. Carey is mentioned in the article because he appointed Mr. Minisci to his new position and because he appointed him International representative in 1992. Mr. Cammack, is quoted in the article as acknowledging Mr. Minisci’s skills and experience. Mr. Cammack is described in the article as the secretary-treasurer of “the largest freight local in the West, with more than 4,000 members in the industry,” and as having worked with Mr. Minisci when they were both Local Union 63 business agents. Mr. Mireles, also identified as secretary-treasurer of Local Union 952, a local union which has freight membership, is quoted describing his experience working with Mr. Minisci as fellow drivers, business agents and participants in the labor movement. Mr. Esquivel is quoted in the article as favoring Mr. Minisci’s appointment and described as having worked closely with Mr. Minisci on freight issues.
The article on the victory of Mr. Cox includes a description of the platform on which Mr. Cox’s slate ran. The platform is described as including various themes. The article does not mention the delegate election in Local Union 63 or any of the candidates in that election.
The ballots were mailed on April 2, 1996. A Cammack slate leaflet was mailed to Local Union 63 members on or about the same date. The March 1996 issue of The Members’ Bulletin was mailed on April 3, 1996.
Margaret Peterson
April 25, 1996
Page 1
The March 1996 issue of The Members’ Bulletin was planned to be mailed in mid-March 1996. However, on or about March 6, 1996, Mr. Behar, on behalf of the Pacific Media Group, the publisher of The Members’ Bulletin, received a letter from Howard Dudley, president of the Southern California Allied Printing Trades Council, that the printer of the Joint Council 92 newspaper, Rodgers & McDonald Graphics (“R & M”), was no longer authorized to use the union label, referred to as the union “bug.” Mr. Behar immediately called the owner of R & M, Greg McDonald, to ask him if his firm had lost the right to use the union bug. Mr. McDonald told Mr. Behar that there had been a misunderstanding which would be resolved so that the firm could still use the union bug. Mr. Behar scheduled the March 1996 issue of The Members’ Bulletin to be printed on March 21, 1996.
When Mr. Behar called the mailing house, Oxford Argonaut, to alert them that the job was coming from R & M, the mailing house questioned the legitimacy of the printer’s union bug. Mr. Behar then decided to pull the job from R & M and advised Joint Council 92 as to what had happened. Mr. Behar also provided a copy of the newspaper’s political endorsement page to the secretary for Mr. Mireles, so that Mr. Mireles could inform the affiliated local unions of the delay and direct them to advise their respective membership regarding political endorsements for the March 26, 1996 California primary.
Mr. Behar tried to find another printer. He looked for a web press, which is able to turn around a large printing project in 24 hours at a much less expensive rate than other kinds of presses. California Offset Printers was the only other web press in the region besides
R & M. However, as a result of the inability of R & M to print union jobs, California Offset Printers was deluged with orders from former patrons of R & M.
Mr. Behar gave the job to California Offset Printers on or about March 22, 1996 and called its vice president daily to try to get the job completed. The printer was not able to get it to press until April 2, 1996. Mr. Behar was not aware of the April 1, 1996 ballot mail date or the mailing of the Cammack slate campaign leaflet. The Election Officer concludes that the Cammack slate did not influence the mail date of the March 1996 The Members’ Bulletin.
Article VIII, Section 8(a) of the Rules states that a union-financed publication or communication may not be “used to support or attack any candidate or the candidacy of any person.” In reviewing union-financed communications for improper campaign content, the Election Officer looks to the tone, content and timing of the publication, as well as its context. Martin, P-010-IBT-PNJ, et al. (August 17, 1995) (decision on remand), aff’d, 95 - Elec.
App. - 18 (KC) (October 2, 1995).
In Martin, the Election Officer recognized that union officers and officials have a “right and responsibility to exercise the powers of their office and to advise and report to the membership on issues of general concern” (quoting Camarata v. International Bhd. of Teamsters, 478 F. Supp. 321, 330 (D.D.C. 1979), aff’d, 108 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2924 (D.C. Cir. 1981)). The Election Officer also recognized in Martin that:
Margaret Peterson
April 25, 1996
Page 1
. . . an otherwise acceptable communication may be considered campaigning if it goes on to make a connection with the election or election process, if it involves excessive direct or indirect personal attacks on candidates, or, alternatively, involves lavish praise of candidates. Otherwise, legitimate coverage of the activities of a union official running for office may constitute campaigning if it is excessive.
The appointment of Mr. Minisci to acting Western Region freight chairman is a matter of interest to members of Joint Council 92 who receive The Members’ Bulletin. Quoting union leaders regarding his appointment is germane to the article. Joint Council 92, composed of Local Union 63 and other local unions in California, is within the Western Region and its membership includes freight drivers. The article on the Local Union 572 delegate election is pertinent in a newspaper for members of Joint Council 92, of which Local Union 572 is a member. Neither the coverage of Mr. Minisci’s appointment in The Members’ Bulletin nor the article on the Local Union 572 delegate election mention the Local Union 63 delegate election.
The March 1996 issue of The Members’ Bulletin was not timed to coincide with the mailing of the Cammack slate leaflet or the Local Union 63 delegate election ballots. The mailing of the March 1996 The Members’ Bulletin was delayed because of the need to find a new union printer to print the publication. While the publication was distributed closely to the ballot distribution for the Local Union 63 delegate election, the March 1996 issue of The Members’ Bulletin did not promote the Cammack slate in violation of the Rules.
In addition to her complaints about The Members’ Bulletin, the protester also complains about certain language in the Cammack slate leaflet. The Election Officer has consistently held that the Rules “neither prohibit nor regulate the content of campaign literature.” Rogers, P-518-LU373-SOU (February 21, 1991).
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
Margaret Peterson
April 25, 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
Dolly M. Gee, Regional Coordinator