September 6, 1996
VIA UPS OVERNIGHT
Chris Schweitzer
10843 Lurline Avenue
Chatsworth, CA 91311
Rene Medrano, Secretary-Treasurer
Teamsters Local Union 896
1616 W. 9th Street, Room 414
Los Angeles, CA 90015
Re: Election Office Case No. P-892-LU896-CLA
Gentlepersons:
Chris Schweitzer, a member of Local Union 896, filed a pre-election protest pursuant to Article XIV, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”) alleging that the premier issue of Local Union 896’s newsletter, “The 896 Reporter,” improperly supported the candidacy of James P. Hoffa for IBT general president, in violation of the Rules. Ms. Schweitzer calls attention to a photograph on the last page of the newsletter, in which seven members are pictured, one of whom is wearing a Hoffa campaign hat. Ms. Schweitzer lodges her protest against the local union and its secretary-treasurer, Rene Medrano.
Local Union 896 responds that the eight-page newsletter contains 36 photographs, that the appearance of a Hoffa hat in one of the photographs is small, and that the articles in the newsletter contain no election-related references at all. The local union further states that the member who is shown with the Hoffa hat, Dale Younger, is only a casual acquaintance of
Mr. Medrano and was not asked or directed to wear the hat. It contends that no one noticed the hat in the picture before Ms. Schweitzer pointed it out after publication.
Chris Schweitzer
September 6, 1996
Page 1
Mr. Medrano states that all of the photographs published in the newsletter were taken at random by a photographer working for the publishing company used by the local union. Mr. Medrano accompanied the photographer to various work sites, but contends that it was the photographer who gathered employees for the pictures. Selection of the photographs that were printed from among those taken was done by Mr. Medrano and Local Union 896 President Jimmy Smith. Mr. Medrano states that neither he nor Mr. Smith noticed the appearance of the Hoffa hat before publication, and that Ms. Schweitzer was the first to point it out.
This protest was investigated by Regional Coordinator Dolly M. Gee.
Article VIII, Section 8(a) of the Rules states that “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 . . . .” In reviewing union-financed communications for improper campaign content, the Election Officer looks to the tone, content and timing of the publication. Martin, P-010-IBT-PNJ, et seq. (August 17, 1995) (decision on remand), aff’d, 95 - Elec. App. - 18 (KC) (October 2, 1995).
The photograph in question is 2¾ 4¼ inches and shows seven members at a Budweiser facility. It appears on the back page of the publication. Within the photograph, no prominence is given to Mr. Younger over any others in his group. The Election Officer notes that 95 persons are depicted in the 36 photographs included in Local Union 896’s newsletter. Upon examining the photographs, 20 of the 95 persons depicted are wearing a hat on which some kind of logo or device is visible. Fifteen persons are wearing a shirt and/or jacket bearing a visible logo or device. Some of these logos or devices are legible, and some are not. Among all of these depictions, the Hoffa hat worn by Mr. Younger is the only visible piece of campaign paraphernalia.
The right of Mr. Younger to wear the hat at his workplace is not questioned in this protest. See Advisory on Wearing of Campaign Buttons and Other Emblems, issued
September 20, 1995. The issue is whether, in evaluating the content of Local Union 896’s newspaper, the inclusion of a photograph showing Mr. Younger wearing a Hoffa hat caused the newspaper to support the candidacy of Mr. Hoffa. The Election Officer finds, given the large number of photographs in the newsletter, the large number of other people depicted in Mr. Younger’s photograph and others, the small depiction of a single Hoffa hat, and the absence of any election-related reference in any of the text, that a reasonable reader of the newsletter would not conclude that the newsletter supports Mr. Hoffa. Accordingly, the Election Officer finds no violation of the Rules.
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:
Chris Schweitzer
September 6, 1996
Page 1
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
Dolly M. Gee, Regional Coordinator