November 18, 1997
VIA UPS OVERNIGHT
James P. Hoffa
November 18, 1997
Page 1
James P. Hoffa
2593 Hounds Chase
Troy, MI 48098
David L. Neigus
Deputy General Counsel
International Brotherhood
of Teamsters
25 Louisiana Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Jim Smith, President
Teamsters Local Union 115
2833 Cottman Avenue
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19149
Richard Brook, Esq.
Cohen, Weiss and Simon
330 W. 42nd Street
New York, NY 10036
Bradley T. Raymond, Esq.
Finkel, Whitefield, Selik,
Raymond, Ferrara & Feldman
32300 Northwestern Highway
Suite 200
Farmington Hills, MI 48334
James P. Hoffa
November 18, 1997
Page 1
Re: Election Office Case No. PR-028-PCT-NYC
Gentlemen:
A pre-election protest was filed pursuant to Article XIV, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the 1995-1996 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”) by James P. Hoffa, a candidate for general president, against Ron Carey, the Pennsylvania Conference of Teamsters and John P. Morris, its president and a candidate on the Carey slate. Mr. Hoffa alleges that an article about the UPS contract ratification, a picture of Mr. Carey and related caption contained in the October issue of The Pennsylvania Conference Report of Teamsters constitutes improper campaigning.
The Carey Campaign and the Pennsylvania Conference of Teamsters respond that the subject of the article, picture and caption was timely and newsworthy and thus does not constitute campaigning in violation of the Rules.
James P. Hoffa
November 18, 1997
Page 1
The protest was investigated by New York City Protest Coordinator Barbara C. Deinhardt.
The protested publication, the union-financed October issue of The Pennsylvania Conference Report of Teamsters(“Report”), is eight pages in length. The article challenged by Mr. Hoffa appears on the sixth page of the Report. The second page of the Report contains the picture and caption to which the protester objects. The article discusses the contract ratification and briefly outlines some of the provisions of the new agreement. The picture depicts Ron Carey talking to John P. Morris and hails the newly ratified United Parcel Service national contract as “A Victory for All Working People.”
According to Mr. Hoffa, this coverage violates the Rules because the UPS strike concluded in August and therefore its timing is not appropriate to the event. He also contends that the coverage is excessive, considering there is another picture of Mr. Morris on the front page.
In response, the charged parties assert that the timing is appropriate because the subject is the UPS contract ratification, an event which immediately preceded the publication. Further, they maintain that the story was of great interest to the conference membership, 14 percent of whom work for UPS. Additionally, the charged parties assert that the article and picture in question constitute only about 7 percent of the space of the October issue and is not excessive.
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. Martin, P-010-IBT-PNJ (August 17, 1995), aff’d, 95 - Elec. App.- 18 (KC) (October 2, 1995). The Election Officer also considers the context in which the communications appeared.
In Martin, the Election Officer recognized that union officers and officials have a “right and responsibility to exercise the powers of their office 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 protested portions of the Report are focused on the ratification of a contract of immediate relevance to 14 percent of the Conference’s membership and of general interest to many other Teamster members. The contract was ratified on October 9, 1997, and the article and picture appeared in the October issue. It is the first edition published since the contract ratification. The article and picture at issue take up only about 2/3 of a page of an 8-page publication. Therefore, the protested material constitutes timely coverage of issues of interest to IBT members and does not constitute impermissible campaigning.
Accordingly, the protest is DENIED.
Any interested party not satisfied with this determination may request a hearing before the Election Appeals Master within one (1) 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, 444 N. Capitol Street, Suite 445, Washington, DC 20001, facsimile
(202) 624-3525. A copy of the protest must accompany the request for a hearing.
Sincerely,
Benetta M. Mansfield
Interim Election Officer
cc: Kenneth Conboy, Election Appeals Master
Barbara C. Deinhardt, NYC Protest Coordinator