November 10, 1998
VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL
Patricia A. Warren
November 10, 1998
Page 1
Patricia A. Warren
11015 Dayton Avenue N.
Seattle, WA 98133
Bob Hasegawa, Sec.-Treas.
Teamsters Local Union 174
553 John Street
Seattle, WA 98109
Mike Gaudio, President
Teamsters Local Union 174
553 John Street
Seattle, WA 98109
James P. Hoffa
2593 Hounds Chase
Troy, MI 48098
Tom Leedham Campaign Office
P.O. Box 15877
Washington, DC 20003
Bradley T. Raymond, Esq.
Finkel, Whitefield, Selik,
Raymond, Ferrara & Feldman
32300 Northwestern Highway
Suite 200
Farmington Hills, MI 48334
Arthur Z. Schwartz, Esq.
Kennedy, Schwartz & Cure
113 University Place
New York, NY 10003
Patricia A. Warren
November 10, 1998
Page 1
Re: Election Office Case No. PR-340-LU174-EOH
Gentlepersons:
Patricia Warren, a member of Local Union 313, filed a pre-election protest pursuant to Article XIV, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the1995-1996 International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”) against Local Union 174 and its Secretary-Treasurer Bob Hasegawa. The protester alleges that on September 10, 1998, during the initiation meeting for new members of Local Union 174, Mr. Hasegawa stated that the reform movement was created to stop the practice of the old guard in lining their pockets with millions of IBT funds. The protester claims that Mr. Hoffa’s name was mentioned in this discussion and Mr. Hasegawa allegedly told the attendees that members cannot allow Mr. Hoffa to be elected because of this history of corruption. The protester’s claims are based on the observations of Daphne Chase who attended the meeting. The protester did not attend the meeting in question.
This protest was investigated by Election Office Staff Attorney Kathryn A. Naylor.
Ms. Chase stated that she arrived approximately half an hour late for the meeting.
Patricia A. Warren
November 10, 1998
Page 1
Ms. Chase stated that Mr. Hasegawa was then in the midst of making a presentation in which he described how Mr. Hoffa and others would collect multiple salaries and misspend union dues. Ms. Chase stated that Mr. Hasegawa then stated that these were the reasons for the government’s intervention and Mr. Hoffa’s removal from office. Ms. Chase claims that during this portion of Mr. Hasegawa’ presentation, there was a slide on the overhead projector that displayed a diagram of a pyramid which represented the various layers of the IBT. Ms. Chase claims that
Mr. Hasegawa also spoke about Tom Leedham in favorable terms although she did not recall the specifics. Ms. Chase claims that she heard approximately 40 minutes of Mr. Hasegawa’s presentation and that the majority of that time was devoted to the International Officers Rerun Election. Ms. Chase has not offered the names of any witnesses who could corroborate her recollection of what occurred at the meeting.
Hobe Williams, a business agent, who was present for the entire meeting on
September 10, 1998, stated that he has attended numerous initiation meetings and that
Mr. Hasegawa’s presentation at these monthly meetings is substantially the same every month. Mr. Williams stated that consistent with prior initiation meetings, Mr. Hasegawa’s presentation on September 10, 1998, addressed the benefits of union membership; the important role unions play; the history of the Teamsters; the different groups and organizations that have been organized by the Teamsters; the allocation of union dues for salaries for employees of the local union, the strike fund and organizing drives. Mr. Williams stated that in discussing the history of the Teamsters, Mr. Hasegawa mentioned the RICO lawsuit that was brought against IBT officers for misappropriating funds, and the 1989 Consent Decree that mandated the supervision of elections for IBT International officers by the government. Mr. Williams admitted that
Mr. Hasegawa mentioned Mr. Hoffa as one of the founders of the Teamsters when a member questioned Mr. Hasegawa regarding whether the same person was running in the upcoming election. Mr. Hasegawa responded to this question by stating that it was not the same person, and that the person running in the upcoming election was the son of the elder Hoffa who had disappeared and was involved with the Teamsters in the past. Mr. Williams denied that
Mr. Hasegawa stated that Mr. Hoffa, the candidate, had collected multiple salaries, misspent union dues or was removed from office by the government as alleged by Ms. Chase.
Mr. Williams noted that the slide to which Ms. Chase referred has no campaign content and is used by Mr. Hasegawa to explain the local and national levels of the Teamsters. The slide lists the following levels in ascending order: membership, regional conferences, executive board and general president. Mr. Williams explained that this chart is somewhat outdated since it shows the regional conferences and Mr. Hasegawa spent some time discussing the elimination of the Western conference, and how funds allocated for the Western conference were returned to the respective local unions in the area. Mr. Williams also stated that near the end of the meeting,
Mr. Hasegawa mentioned the fact that the International election was approaching and urged everyone to vote, without mentioning any particular candidate or slate.
Patricia A. Warren
November 10, 1998
Page 1
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:
. . . 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.
Prior decisions of the Election Officer have also noted that so long as a report or communication on the activity of an incumbent “is addressed to the regular functions, policies and activities of such incumbents as officers involved in matters of interest to the membership, and not as candidates for reelection, there is no violation of [the Act]”. Donovan v. Metro Dist. Council, 797 F.2d 140, 145 (3d Cir. 1986), citing Camarata, supra.
The Election Officer has previously determined that issues ranging from collective bargaining to NAFTA are topics of legitimate interest to IBT members. Michaels, P-205-LU407-CLE (November 8, 1995); Riley, P-101-IBT-EOH (August 23, 1995), aff’d, 95 - Elec. App. - 14 (KC) (September 29, 1995); Hoffa, P-1181-IBT-EOH (November 18, 1996). Additionally, numerous topics discussed in the various articles and features of printed communications (The Teamster and the Teamster Leader) have been determined to be of legitimate interest to union members. Martin, supra (review of IBT finances, organizing the unorganized, imposition of trusteeships, corruption within the union); Hoffa, P-126-IBT-EOH (October 4, 1995) (strike benefits); Hoffa, P-126-IBT-EOH (October 4, 1995) (IBT political action and lobbying); Hoffa, P-808-IBT-SCE (June 28, 1996), aff’d, 96 - Elec. App. - 213
(July 17, 1996) (advocacy of reforms by IBT, summarizing achievements since last Convention, discussion of Convention issues); In re Hoffa, 96 - Elec. App. - 97 (KC) (February 23, 1996) (efforts to free the IBT of corrupt influence); In re Hoffa, 96 - Elec. App. - 199 (KC) (March 11, 1996) (cutting waste, making the union more efficient).
The Election Officer credits Mr. Williams testimony regarding the substance of
Patricia A. Warren
November 10, 1998
Page 1
Mr. Hasegawa’s speech on September 10, 1998. The investigator randomly selected and spoke with five members who attended the meeting.[1] Two of the five members recalled that “Hoffa” was mentioned; one member stated that Hoffa was mentioned as a Teamster of the past and the other member stated that in response to Mr. Hasegawa question, “what comes to mind when you think of Teamsters?” someone said strong-armed gangsters and Hoffa. The member claims that Mr. Hasegawa did not in turn elaborate further on Mr. Hoffa. Most members could not recall the specifics of Mr. Hasegawa’s presentation other than a discussion of how their dues were allocated and history of the Teamsters. All five did not recall any discussion of Tom Leedham, other candidates or the rerun election.
The Election Officer finds that the topics covered in Mr. Hasegawa’s presentation constitute issues of legitimate concern to IBT members. Although the Election Officer cannot determine exactly what was said, the evidence indicates that the elder Mr. Hoffa was mentioned in a non-partisan fashion during Mr. Hasegawa’s discussion of the history of the Teamsters. The investigation did not reveal any evidence that the candidate Mr. Hoffa was mentioned other than Mr. Hasegawa’s response to a member’s question that distinguished the candidate from his father. Such clarification by itself does not violate the Rules. The investigation did not reveal any evidence that supported Ms. Chase’s assertion that Mr. Hasegawa discussed Mr. Leedham or the rerun election in a partisan fashion for the majority of his presentation.
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 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
[1]The investigator received a list of the 45 members who attended the September 10 meeting from Local Union 174.