Protest Decisions

November 16, 1998

VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL

Chris Schweitzer

November 16, 1998

Page 1

Chris Schweitzer

10843 Lurline Avenue

Chatsworth, CA 91311

Keith Monte

1008 Meadow Lark Drive

Fillmore, CA 93015

Ed Garcia, Steward

Teamsters Local Union 896

3303 Wilshire Boulevard

Suite 300

Los Angeles, CA 90010

Tom Leedham Campaign Office

P.O. Box 15877

Washington, DC 20003

Chris Schweitzer

November 16, 1998

Page 1

Re: Election Office Case No. PR-305-LU896-EOH

Gentlepersons:

Chris Schweitzer, a member of Local Union 896, 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 Keith Monte, a fellow member of Local Union 896.  The protester alleges that Mr. Monte has consistently removed campaign material that she has posted, in violation of the Rules.  Mr. Monte denies the allegation.

The protest was investigated by Election Office Staff Attorney Peter F. Gimbrère.

Both Ms. Schweitzer and Mr. Monte are employees at the Anheuser Busch facility located in Van Nuys, California.  A protest involving Anheuser Busch’s removal of the union bulletin boards at the Van Nuys facility resulted in a temporary lack of any bulletin boards at the facility on which members could properly post campaign material.[1]  During that period and due to the lack of union bulletin boards, Ms. Schweitzer posted campaign material in support of the Tom Leedham “Rank and File Power” Slate (“Leedham Slate”) on various walls and other surfaces in the break rooms located throughout the facility.  When the company informed all of the employees that no postings of any sort would be allowed on the walls of the facility,

Chris Schweitzer

November 16, 1998

Page 1

Ms. Schweitzer taped her campaign literature to the metal shelves and the table tops in the various break rooms.

On September 22, 1998, the protester alleges that she witnessed Mr. Monte tearing down three campaign flyers from a metal shelf located next to the microwave in the break room.  According to Ms. Schweitzer, a verbal confrontation between herself and Mr. Monte then ensued.  Ms. Schweitzer testified that a large amount of her posted campaign material has been torn down or otherwise removed in the past.  She maintains that Mr. Monte is the individual responsible for the removal of her campaign literature.  However, aside from her testimony regarding the September 22 incident, Ms. Schweitzer offered no evidence to the Election Office representative detailing Mr. Monte’s alleged involvement.

Mr. Monte states that he knocked the campaign literature at issue onto the floor by mistake as he opened the microwave door while making popcorn.  He stated that after the literature fell to the floor, he and Ms. Schweitzer engaged in a short, profanity-laden argument.  While Mr. Monte admits to having verbal confrontations over union politics with Ms. Schweitzer in the past, he denies ever intentionally taking down the protester’s campaign literature.  None of the witnesses provided by Ms. Schweitzer were able to fully corroborate Ms. Schweitzer’s account.

The Rules at Article VIII, Section 11(d) authorize union members to use employer or union bulletin boards for campaign publicity where a pre-existing for such use has been established.  The Election Officer has consistently held that the removal or defacement of properly posted campaign literature is a serious violation of the Rules (emphasis added).  See Amodio, P-1073-LU182/317-PGH (November 20, 1991); Teller, P-945-LU741-PNW (October 14, 1991); Fleeger, P-876-LU988-SOU (September 11, 1991); Blake, P-767-LU439-CSF (July 1, 1996).

While the Election Office finds Ms. Schweitzer’s account of the removal of the campaign literature credible, the protester failed to show how the actions of Mr. Monte constituted a violation of the Rules, as the placement of the campaign literature on the metal shelf in the break room in no way constituted proper posting.  It is well-established that campaign literature which is not properly posted is not protected by the Rules.  See Braga, P-795-LU439-CSF (June 16, 1996).  However, as the bulletin boards initially removed by Anheuser Busch have been replaced as of the date of this decision, the Election Officer finds that the protester can now properly post campaign literature at the facility.

Accordingly, the protest is DENIED.

Chris Schweitzer

November 16, 1998

Page 1

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 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

cc:              Kenneth Conboy, Election Appeals Master