Protest Decisions

              September 25, 1996

VIA UPS OVERNIGHT

Robert Spearman

September 25, 1996

Page 1

Robert Spearman

c/o Stand Up for Teamsters Slate

10733 S. Western Avenue

Chicago, IL  60643

Frank H. Wood, Secretary-Treasurer

Teamsters Local Union 28

5318 Wade Hampton Boulevard

Taylors, SC  29687

Kenneth W. Wood, President

Teamsters Local Union 79

5818 E. MLK Jr. Boulevard

Tampa, FL  33619

Kenneth E. Hilbish, President

Teamsters Local Union 528

2540 Lakewood Avenue, S.W.

Atlanta, GA  30315

Don L. West, President

Teamsters Local Union 612

50 Bagby Drive

Birmingham, AL  35209

Don Newton, President

Teamsters Local Union 667

796 E. Brooks Avenue

Memphis, TN  38116

Donald S. Scott, President

Teamsters Local Union 728

2540 Lakewood Avenue, S.W.

Atlanta, GA  30315

Robert Spearman

September 25, 1996

Page 1

Re:  Election Office Case No. P-967-LU28-SEC

Gentlemen:

Robert Spearman, a member of Local Union 480 and a candidate for vice president-at-large, 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 Local

Robert Spearman

September 25, 1996

Page 1

Unions 28, 79, 528, 612, 667 and 728 violated Article VIII, Section 1(b) of the Rules by intentionally failing to provide him and the Stand Up for Teamsters slate with a list of the local unions’ work sites within five days of his request as required by the Rules.  He further alleges that this failure to act caused or could have caused the Stand Up for Teamsters slate to miss opportunities to campaign.

All six local unions deny any intent to deprive the Mr. Spearman and the Stand Up for Teamsters slate of campaign opportunities.

Regional Coordinator J. Griffin Morgan investigated this protest.

Mr. Spearman requested the local unions’ work-site lists pursuant to Article VIII, Section 1(b) of the Rules: 

Each delegate candidate, each alternate delegate candidate and each nominated or accredited International Officer candidate shall have the right to a current list of all sites, with corresponding addresses, where any and all Local Union members work.  Requests for such worksite lists shall be made to the Local Union’s Secretary-Treasurer or principal executive officer in writing and shall be honored within five (5) days.

Mr. Spearman’s request for the work-site list was a form request addressed to the “Local Principle [sic] Officer.”  Although the request form was dated September 5, 1996, the actual requests were not faxed to the local union offices until after business hours on the following three days.               

The Election Officer will discuss the compliance of each local union separately.

1.              Local Union 528

Local Union 528 submitted a copy of Mr. Spearman’s request to the Regional Coordinator.  The fax identification line at the top of the page indicated receipt on

September 6, 1996 at 10:31 p.m.  For purposes of compliance, the Election Officer will consider the fax to have been received on September 7.  Therefore, Local Union 528 had until September 12, 1996 to comply with Mr. Spearman’s request in a timely manner.[1]  Local Union 528 did not mail its work-site list until September 16, 1996.  It stated that the local union was involved in negotiations and a potential strike with their largest employer that week.  The time periods provided in the Rules are also important.  The Election Officer finds that Local Union 528’s four-day delay is not justified.

Robert Spearman

September 25, 1996

Page 1

2.              Local Union 28

The fax identification line on the request received by Local Union 28 indicates receipt on September 6, 1996 at 10:58 p.m.  For purposes of compliance, the Election Officer will consider the fax to have been received on September 7.  Therefore, Local Union 28 had until September 12, 1996 to comply with Mr. Spearman’s request in a timely manner.  Local

Union 28 mailed protester its work-site list on September 11, 1996, within the five-day period.  After receipt of the protest, Local Union 28 faxed the protester the work-site list on

September 16, 1996. 

3.              Local Union 612

The fax identification line on the request received by Local Union 612 indicates receipt on September 6, 1996 at 11:51 p.m.  For purposes of compliance the Election Officer will consider the fax to have been received on September 7.  Therefore, Local Union 612 had until September 12, 1996 to comply with Mr. Spearman’s request in a timely manner.  The local union mailed Mr. Spearman and the Stand Up for Teamsters slate its work-site list on September 11, 1996, within the five-day period.

4.              Local Union 79

The fax identification line on the request received by Local Union 79 indicates receipt on September 7, 1996 at 11:50 p.m.  For purposes of compliance, the Election Officer will consider the fax to have been received on September 8.  Therefore, Local Union 79 had until September 13, 1996 to respond to the protester’s request in a timely manner.  Local Union 79 mailed the work-site list on September 13, 1996, also within the five-day period. 

5.              Local Union 667

Investigation did not reveal when Local Union 667 received its request from

Mr. Spearman.  However, Local Union 667 mailed its work-site list to the protester on September 9, 1996, which would make its reply timely even if Mr. Spearman had sent the request on the date of the form:  September 5, 1996.  Local Union 667 again sent a copy of the work-site list to the protester on September 16, 1996. 

6.              Local Union 728

Investigation also did not reveal when Local Union 728 received its request from

Robert Spearman

September 25, 1996

Page 1

Mr. Spearman.  In any event, the local union did not attempt to comply.  Richard Black, Local Union 728 secretary-treasurer, states that he threw the request away because it was not addressed to anyone at Local Union 728 and he assumed it did not apply to the local union.  Local Union 728 did not mail its work-site list until after the receipt of Mr. Spearman’s protest on September 17, 1996.  The Election Officer finds that Mr. Spearman’s request complied with the requirements of Article VIII, Section 1 of the Rules and that Mr. Black had an obligation under the Rules to treat the request seriously and respond in a timely fashion.  Therefore, the Election Officer finds that Local Union 728 violated the Rules. 

7.              Allegations of Conspiracy

Mr. Spearman did not present any evidence that there was any conspiracy among the local unions not to comply with his request.  With the possible exception of Local Union 728, the Election Officer finds that there is no evidence to support Mr. Spearman’s allegation of intentional failure to comply with his request.  Therefore, there could not have been concerted action.

Accordingly, the protest is GRANTED with respect to Local Union 528 and Local Union 728, and DENIED in all other respects.

When the Election Officer determines that the Rules have been violated, she “may take whatever remedial action is appropriate.”  Article XIV, Section 4.  In fashioning the appropriate remedy, the Election Officer views the nature and seriousness of the violation, as well as its potential for interfering with the election process.

Local Union 528 and Local Union 728 shall cease and desist from any further violations of Article VIII, Section 1(b) of the Rules and shall cease and desist from any further failures to comply with requests for work-site lists from International officer candidates.

Mr. Spearman did not present any evidence of lost opportunities to campaign.  In light of the fact that Mr. Spearman has now received all of the work-site lists, the Election Officer finds that no further remedy is necessary.

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

Robert Spearman

September 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

J. Griffin Morgan, Regional Coordinator