April 12, 1996
VIA UPS OVERNIGHT
Earl Parker
129 Fletcher Ford Road
Fayetteville, GA 30215
Donald Scott, President
Teamsters Local Union 728
2540 Lakewood Avenue, S.W.
Atlanta, GA 30315
Re: Election Office Case No. Post-008-LU728-SEC
Gentlemen:
A post-election protest was filed by Earl Parker, pursuant to Article XIV, Section 3 of the Rules for the 1995-1996 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”). Mr. Parker, a member of Local Union 728, was an unsuccessful candidate for delegate. He was a candidate on the Concerned Teamsters Team slate.
The ballots for the delegate election in Local Union 728 were counted on March 14, 1996. Mr. Parker believes that the ballots were tampered with by Local Union 728,
President Donald Scott and the IBT. It is Mr. Parker’s further belief that this tampering occurred through the use of multiple post office boxes. He theorizes that the ballots mailed by his supporters were diverted to another mailbox of which the Election Office has no knowledge. He requests an opportunity to review the election control roster and the pre-addressed outer envelopes submitted by the members of Local Union 728 who voted in the delegate election.
The protest was investigated by Regional Coordinator J. Griffin Morgan.
Earl Parker
April 12, 1996
Page 1
Pursuant to the Rules at Article III, Section 1(a), it is the duty of the Election Office to mail out the ballots. Neither the IBT, any local union or any local union officer participates in this process. The Rules at Article X, Section 4, afford any candidate or slate of candidates the opportunity to inspect the ballot prototype prior to printing and the printer’s certification number as to the number of ballots printed. Neither the protester nor his slate availed themselves of this right.
Under Article X, Section 5 of the Rules, observers are permitted to attend and monitor the entire mailing process. Representatives of the Concerned Teamsters Team slate accompanied Mr. Morgan to the post office when the ballots were collected. These same observers zealously scrutinized the marking of the election control roster and were further able to examine the pre-addressed envelopes. Mr. Morgan did a special check with the post office on March 22, 1996, eight days after the counting of the ballots had been completed. Only
28 ballots were received at the post office after the deadline. Over 2,700 ballots were cast. For both alternates and delegates, the margin between the successful candidates and the runner-ups was approximately 400 votes.
Upon being confronted with this information, the protester could neither provide any details to the alleged ballot tampering scheme nor provide any evidence to demonstrate its existence in fact.
The Rules at Article XIV, Section 1, impose on the protester the initial burden to present evidence that a violation has occurred. In Re: Chentnik, 95 - Elec. App. - 52 (KC) (January 10, 1996). Here, the protester has failed to submit any evidence substantiating his allegations.
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
Earl Parker
April 12, 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