October 24, 1996
VIA UPS OVERNIGHT
Chuck Mack
October 24, 1996
Page 1
Chuck Mack, President
Teamsters Joint Council 7
150 Executive Park Boulevard
Suite 2900
San Francisco, CA 94134
Bob Blanchet
3853 Dryden Road
Fremont, CA 94555
Ray Corrie, Secretary-Treasurer
Teamsters Local Union 287
1452 N. 4th Street
San Jose, CA 95112
Ron Carey Campaign
c/o Nathaniel Charny
Cohen, Weiss & Simon
330 W. 42nd Street
New York, NY 10036
Chuck Mack
October 24, 1996
Page 1
Re: Election Office Case No. P-1021-IBT-CSF
Gentlemen:
Chuck Mack, president of Joint Council 7 and a candidate for International vice president 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
Robert Blanchet, a member of Local Union 287. Mr. Mack contends that Mr. Blanchet has been campaigning full time for Ron Carey, a candidate for general president, since the IBT Convention in July 1996, while on the payroll of Local Union 287. Mr. Mack contends that the IBT is reimbursing Local Union 287 for Mr. Blanchet’s services to the campaign. Finally, Mr. Mack contends that the union-financed campaigning alleged by Mr. Blanchet is “national in scope.”
Chuck Mack
October 24, 1996
Page 1
Mr. Blanchet and the IBT respond that Mr. Blanchet was employed by the Carey campaign prior to the IBT Convention. Since the third week of August 1996, however, they state that Mr. Blanchet has been a temporary employee of the IBT Field Services Department. In this capacity, Mr. Blanchet works 35 hours per week distributing La Voz, the IBT-produced Spanish-language newsletter to members, assisting in the voter registration rallies, and gathering signatures on an IBT petition relating to a campaign regarding overtime legislation. The IBT states that Mr. Blanchet is paid directly by Local Union 287, rather than the IBT, so he can continue to accrue pension credits in the Western States plan and the IBT then reimburses the local union for Mr. Blanchet’s wages.
This protest was investigated by Regional Coordinator Matthew D. Ross.
Mr. Mack claims that Mr. Blanchet is campaigning in the California Central Valley every day. Mr. Mack bases these allegations on evidence that Mr. Blanchet was campaigning in Fresno, California on October 7, 1996 at San Benito Foods.
The investigation revealed that since August 19, 1996, Mr. Blanchet has been employed by the IBT in their Field Services Department and as a temporary Teamster Vote ‘96 Project Organizer. His paycheck is received from Local Union 287 so that contributions can continue to be paid to the Western States Fund. Mr. Blanchet works under Joe Henry, a Field Representative, and reports to Joe Fahey, an International Representative in the IBT warehouse division with special responsibility for members in the food processing industry.
The investigation revealed that Mr. Blanchet is paid for 35 hours per week, and he schedules his work hours depending on the requirements of his assignments. Mr. Blanchet has an irregular work schedule based on his assignments. On some days, he works 15 or more hours per day, including his travel time. On other days, he will schedule less time for IBT-assigned work. One of his primary jobs is distributing La Voz at plant gates. Mr. Blanchet attempts to schedule these distributions around the various plant shift changes. Therefore,
Mr. Blanchet states, and his job assignments seem to support, that he has several hours between shift changes during which he is not on paid union time.
Mr. Blanchet admits that he frequently campaigns for Mr. Carey during these personal unpaid periods. Mr. Blanchet states that he never distributes campaign material when he is handing out La Voz or the IBT overtime petitions, nor does he work for the IBT then self-declare a break and begin campaigning at the same location. Mr. Blanchet states that if he intends to campaign at a location where he is on union business for the IBT, he returns to that location later to campaign. The investigation did not produce any evidence to refute these contentions by Mr. Blanchet.
As to the specific allegations concerning campaigning in Fresno on October 7,
Mr. Blanchet states that he was in Fresno that day campaigning for Mr. Carey at Fleming Foods in the morning for approximately one hour with Ken Mee, a candidate for International vice president, and George Saaverdra. At about 1:30 p.m. on that day, Mr. Blanchet began working for the IBT. Thus, he distributed the overtime petition at several freight facilities, including Yellow Freight, Roadway and Consolidated Freightways. He then spent the remainder of the day driving to canneries to distribute La Voz.
Chuck Mack
October 24, 1996
Page 1
Mr. Blanchet is required to submit a weekly report to the IBT of his activities. During the investigation, the IBT supplied these reports. The reports state where Mr. Blanchet worked and the date of the work. They do not detail the time spent in each location or the total time spent doing IBT work during the week. Although the Election Officer believes the records should more accurately reflect the time spent engaging in these activities, the records nevertheless indicate that Mr. Blanchet is performing functions for the IBT.
In the course of the investigation, Mr. Mack raised concerns regarding Mr. Blanchet’s combining campaigning with the performance of union duties, which he believes to be far less than a regular work week’s worth of responsibility. Specifically, he states:
The performance of legitimate union business should not be treated as an allowance to spend an unlimited amount of time campaigning. It would be standing the Rule on its head to approve an arrangement whereby paid working time may be only incidental to campaign activity. This is particularly true where the work assignments are designed to provide access to work locations where campaigning is thought to be desirable . . .
Article VIII, Section 11(b) of the Rules protects the right of a union employee to “participate in campaign activities, including the right . . . to openly support or oppose any candidate, to aid or campaign for any candidate, and to make personal contributions.” The section further provides:
However, such campaigning must not involve the expenditure of Union funds. Accordingly, officers and employees (and other members) of the Union may not campaign on time that is paid for by the Union. Campaigning incidental to regular Union business is not, however, violative of this section. Further, campaigning during paid vacation, paid lunch hours or breaks, or similar paid time off is also not violative of this section.
In Caraballo, P-653-LU272-NYC (April 3, 1996), the Election Officer held that a business agent who worked irregular hours and contended that a mid-morning delivery of campaign literature was during a self-declared break, was campaigning on personal time as permitted by the Rules. The Election Officer cited evidence that the union employee’s work day averaged approximately nine or 10 hours a day, his work week extended to weekends and he was permitted to select when he takes a break and the length of his break. See also Hoffa, P-812-IBT-NYC (August 16, 1996); Hoffa, P-865-IBT-MGN (August 26, 1996), aff’d,
96 - Elec. App. - 232 (September 6, 1996).
The Election Officer’s investigation shows that Mr. Blanchet’s assigned duties reasonably comprise a 35-hour work week of legitimate union business. Mr. Blanchet travels to various locations to conduct union business for the IBT, including the distribution of La Voz, soliciting signatures on the overtime petitions and worked on organizing the Modesto voter registration rally.
Chuck Mack
October 24, 1996
Page 1
While Mr. Mack contends that Mr. Blanchet’s working time is “incidental to [his] campaign activity,” this misconstrues the Rules. Neither the IBT nor Mr. Blanchet is contending that his campaign activity is incidental to legitimate union business. They contend that Mr. Blanchet only engages in campaigning on non-union time. This is explicitly permitted by the Rules. There is no evidence that the purpose of the trips Mr. Blanchet takes for the IBT in Northern California are for the purpose of campaigning. The fact that
Mr. Blanchet may engage in campaigning at these locations on his own time is not a violation of the Rules.
Accordingly, the protest is DENIED.
Although the Election Officer has not found a violation of the Rules, the Election Officer is concerned with the record-keeping required by the IBT because it does not indicate the time spent on union business for employees who are required to file such reports. There-fore, from the date of receipt of this decision through December 10, 1996, the Election Officer directs the IBT to have Mr. Blanchet fill out weekly reports which include the activity engaged in, the specific hours engaged in the activity, and the date of the activity. A copy of these weekly reports shall be transmitted to the Election Officer.
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