June 19, 1998
VIA UPS OVERNIGHT
James P. Hoffa
June 19, 1998
Page 1
James P. Hoffa
2593 Hounds Chase
Troy, MI 48098
Hoffa Slate
c/o Patrick J. Szymanski, Esq.
Baptiste & Wilder
1150 Connecticut Avenue, NW
Suite 500
Washington, DC 20036
Ken Hall, Director
Parcel and Small Package Trade Division
International Brotherhood of Teamsters
25 Louisiana Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001
David L. Neigus
Deputy General Counsel
International Brotherhood of Teamsters
25 Louisiana Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Bradley T. Raymond, Esq.
Finkel, Whitefield, Selik,
Raymond, Ferrara & Feldman
32300 Northwestern Highway
Suite 200
Farmington Hills, MI 48334
Henry F. Murray, Esq.
Livingston, Adler, Pulda & Meiklejohn
557 Prospect Avenue
Hartford, CT 06105
James P. Hoffa
June 19, 1998
Page 1
Re: Election Office Case No. PR-105-IBT-EOH
Gentlemen:
James P. Hoffa, a candidate for general 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 Ken Hall and the IBT. Mr. Hall serves as Director of the IBT Parcel and Small Package Trade Division and is also a self-declared candidate for general president. The protester alleges that Mr. Hall used union resources to promote his campaign. The IBT contends that the protest has no merit and should be dismissed.
The protest was investigated by Regional Coordinator Judith E. Kuhn.
James P. Hoffa
June 19, 1998
Page 1
The IBT financed a publication entitled A Steward’s Guide to Enforcing the National Agreement (“Guide”). The Guide, a pamphlet consisting of 79 pages, highlights and summarizes the important provisions of the recently ratified UPS national collective bargaining agreement. According to the IBT, the Guide was finalized in May of this year and distributed to UPS stewards only. The IBT further states that the Guide was “developed to ensure vigilant enforcement of the contract.”
The first page of the Guide displays a small picture of Mr. Hall, approximately an inch by an inch and one-half. The page also contains a seven paragraph open-style letter addressed to UPS stewards from Mr. Hall. The letter begins by thanking the stewards for the “good jobs during our historic contract victory at UPS in 1997” and further invites them to “take that same energy and spirit of unity and use it to make UPS live up to the gains we won.” The Guide is referred to as containing “a number of helpful suggestions and a list of resources available from the International Union.” Local union officers are credited with providing “[M]any of the contract enforcement ideas” found within the Guide and stewards are invited to “share” their own ideas and suggestions for compliance with their local union or the IBT. The letter closes in the following words:
Stewards are the foundation of a strong union. I sincerely appreciate your efforts to continue our fight for a better future for working families. Keep up the good work!
A similar contract enforcement guide was issued in 1994, after the previous collective bargaining agreement was ratified. The pamphlet was 29 pages in length and contained no photographs.
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 Election Officer also recognized in Martin that:
James P. Hoffa
June 19, 1998
Page 1
. . . an otherwise acceptable communication may be considered campaigning if it goes on to make a connection with the election or the election process, if it involves excessive direct or indirect personal attacks on candidates, or alternatively, involves lavish praise of candidates. Otherwise legitimate coverage of the activities of a union official running for office may constitute campaigning if it is excessive.
The protester does not dispute that UPS collective bargaining negotiations and its outcome are of wide and legitimate interest to all union members. Michaels, P-205-LU407-CLE (November 8, 1995). Nor does the protester contend that Mr. Hall’s introductory letter makes impermissible references to the election. Rather, the sole contention of the protester is that the open letter and the picture violate the Rules because they are “unprecedented” and provide “excessive” publicity to Mr. Hall’s candidacy.
It is well established that union leaders are entitled to have their activities reported on in union-financed publications so long as the article bears a reasonable relationship to the officer’s level of participation in the activity. See, Durham, P-250-IBT (February 5, 1991); Martin, supra at 16. Mr. Hall was the chief spokesman for the IBT in the UPS negotiations and his level of activity in that process was high. The seven paragraph letter expresses appreciation to and congratulates the stewards for their efforts and encourages them to remain vigilant in the enforcement of the contract. Mr. Hall’s activity justifies the coverage and the display of his picture is directly related to the subject matter. See Hoffa, P-202-IBT-EOH (November 17, 1995), aff’d, 95 - Elec. App. - 39 (KC) (November 30, 1995); Lamy, P-258-IBT-EOH (December 18, 1995), aff’d, 96 - Elec. App. - 53 (KC) (January 11, 1996).
The Election Officer concludes that neither the letter nor the picture provides excessive publicity to Mr. Hall’s campaign and consequently are not violations of the Rules.
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
James P. Hoffa
June 19, 1998
Page 1
Copies of the request for hearing must be served on the parties listed above as well as upon the Election Officer, 444 North Capitol Street, NW, Suite 445, Washington, DC 20001, Facsimile (202) 624-3525. A copy of the protest must accompany the request for a hearing.
Sincerely,
Michael G. Cherkasky
Election Officer
MGC:chh
cc: Kenneth Conboy, Election Appeals Master
Judith E. Kuhn, Regional Coordinator