Ransom, 2026 ESD 63
OFFICE OF THE ELECTION SUPERVISOR
for the
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS
IN RE: JESSE RANSOM ) Protest Decision: 2026 ESD 63
) Issued: April 2, 2026
Protestor. )
)
BACKGROUND
Jesse Ransom and Jose Franscisco Negrete filed a pre-election protest against Eric Jiminez and Giordano “Nick” Bruno alleging that Bruno and a shop steward, Carrie Gonzalez,[1] berated and yelled at him while Ransom was campaigning for the Dump O’Brien slate outside the UPS Anaheim Hub in violation of the Rules for the 2025-2026 International Brotherhood of Teamsters International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”).
Pearl Moenahele-Hill of the Office of the Election Supervisor (“OES”) investigated this protest. She interviewed protestor Jesse Ransom,[2] Nate Thompson, a Local 952 member and candidate on the Dump O’Brien slate, Nick Bruno, a Local 952 Business Agent and candidate on the Members First slate, Steven Teats, a Local 952 member working part-time at UPS Anaheim Hub, and Jennifer Sellers, a Local 952 member and UPS employee.[3] The Dump O’Brien slate and the Members First slate are opposing slates in Local 952’s delegate election.
Ransom’s Statement
Ransom stated that on February 13, 2026, shortly after his workday ended at 8:00 am, he and Thompson began campaigning to members outside the UPS Anaheim Hub, where he works. Around 10:00 am on February 13, 2026, Gonzalez, one of three shop stewards exiting the main building around the same time as Bruno, approached Ransom, asked him about his campaign, and then the two of them stepped to the side to talk. Bruno then joined them, and he and Gonzalez questioned Ransom about why he was running for delegate, stating that doing so was a “slap in the face” to the local and incumbent administration and told him that he shouldn’t be running because “everything is fine.” Ransom told Bruno and Gonzalez that he thought rank-and-file members should have a voice, not just union officials. He said that they continued to yell at Ransom calling him a liar and ungrateful and accusing him of not knowing enough to run for delegate. Gonzalez cursed at Ransom telling him to “Go fuck yourself.” Thompson, who had been campaigning with Ransom, then came over and told Ransom they should leave, and the altercation ended. They did not resume campaigning at this point. However, despite leaving a little earlier than planned and with a handful of members they had not yet campaigned to, Ransom felt that their campaigning was successful because he and Thompson spoke to almost all of the drivers and warehouse workers at the hub and passed out over 100 flyers.
Ransom acknowledged that no direct threats of violence were made against him by Bruno or the shop stewards.[4] According to Ransom there were about seven members located in the nearby area with a couple more in the parking lot, and a couple of supervisors and/or managers and a security guard witnessed the incident.
Thompson’s Statement
Thompson stated that while campaigning with Ransom for the Dump O’Brien slate, he observed a female shop steward say something to Ransom and the two walk off to the side to talk. He saw Bruno approach Ransom and the female and exchange words. Bruno called Ransom a traitor for running for delegate, and accused him of betraying Bruno and having no integrity. Thompson stated that voices were raised, the conversation was heated, and that at one point, Gonzalez cussed at Ransom and flipped him off. However, Thompson stated that he did not hear any threats of harm or violence. Thompson remained quiet because he did not want to escalate the situation. After Gonzalez swore at Ransom, Thompson told Ransom he thought they should leave and they did.
Bruno’s Statement
Bruno[5] stated that on February 13, 2026, he had been at the UPS Anaheim Hub with four shop stewards, Carrie Gonzalez, Carter Smith, Rodolfo Roman, and Jalaice Thomson, attending meetings with UPS management. Around 10 a.m., Gonzalez, Smith, and Roman exited the building first while Bruno and Thomson were being scanned out at the guard shack. Bruno saw Gonzalez walking toward her car in the parking lot and Ransom start walking towards her. When Ransom saw Bruno, he started walking towards Bruno with his hand extended for a handshake. According to Bruno, Ransom asked why Bruno was upset, if he was mad at him, and asked if Bruno was trying to get him fired. Bruno said that this surprised him because he had saved Ransom’s job after an incident in November 2025 and he became angry. Bruno stated that he asked Ransom what he knew about being a delegate and how often he has gone to local meetings; Ransom admitted not much. Bruno acknowledged that the conversation got heated but stated that at no time did he or the shop stewards threaten physical harm or violence. Bruno stated that he believed that Gonzalez swore at Ransom because Ransom had followed her to where her car was parked at which point Thompson walked over and told Ransom that they should leave. Bruno said that he stayed with the shop stewards to talk amongst themselves a while longer, then left. The entire exchange lasted no more than five minutes.
Teat’s Statement
Teats stated that he observed a female shop steward walk out of the main building followed by Business Agent Bruno and approach Ransom. He stated that he did not know exactly what was going on but could tell that the conversation was heated. He heard Bruno make various comments to Ransom such as, “you have no loyalty, you’re a liar, you don’t even know what a delegate does.” He said that Gonzalez made snarky remarks towards Ransom for example, “does anyone have a tissue for Jesse’s tears?” Teats stated that he tried to interject by asking questions about the delegate election in an effort to de-escalate the situation. The confrontation ended when Thompson told Ransom they should leave. Teats stated that the encounter lasted maybe five minutes, definitely not more than ten.
Sellers Statements
Sellers, who knows Ransom from his work on the safety committee, stated that she was outside between the main entrance and the parking lot at the time of the incident. She saw Ransom standing by his car talking to another member. Sellers heard Gonzalez ask Ransom, “how’s your debate going?” Sellers thought it was a sincere question. Ransom walked over to talk to her and Bruno soon followed, along with one other shop steward whose name she did not know. Sellers stated that she could not clearly hear the conversation but heard Bruno tell Ransom to go to meetings and something about grocery stores and heard Gonzalez say loudly to Ransom, “Fuck you!” Sellers stated that Ransom was not being loud and did not swear. Sellers could tell that the conversation was heated, but she did not hear any threats of physical violence by anyone involved.
ANALYSIS
The witnesses’ statements about the incident giving rise to this protest are generally similar. Based on our investigation, we find the following: On February 13, 2026, Ransom and Thompson were handing out flyers and campaigning in support of the Dump O’Brien outside the UPS facility for a couple hours before Gonzalez, a shop steward, exited the main building, followed by Bruno. Gonzalez and Ransom began engaging in a conversation first and then Bruno joined them, and a heated exchange ensued. Although the specific language of the exchange varies by witness, the witnesses state that it was a heated exchange that involved Bruno yelling at Ransom in connection with the delegate election and that at one point Gonzalez cursed at him. At this point, Thompson advised Bruno that they should leave, and the interaction ended. The exchange lasted approximately five minutes.
The facts here do not establish a violation of the Rules. The Rules protect union members and officers right to participate freely in campaign activities without intimidation or threat of retaliation. See Rules, Art. VII. However, loud, rude, aggressive, and obnoxious behavior is protected. Zuckerman, 2015 ESD 7 (July 15, 2015). Although intimidation may constitute retaliation, which is not protected conduct, the evidence does not demonstrate that the conduct here rose to that level. To reach a finding of intimidation, the evidence must show that a member engaged in physically or verbally aggressive behavior that threatens actual harm. Compare Hoffa-Hall 2011, 2011 ESD 323 (September 11, 2011), aff’d 11 EAM 57 (September 16, 2011) (verbal confrontation and touching person’s arm not intimidation) with Pope, 2011 ESD 309 (August 5, 2011) (verbal confrontation followed by intentional striking and knockdown violated Rules); Lopez, P-456-LU743-CHI (April 10, 1996) (finding “I’ll kill you” to violate Rules in light of ongoing animosity between the parties); Smith, P-600-LU150-CSF (April 30, 1996) (finding remark “you’ll be taken out of here in a body bag” to, violate Rules); Kelly, P-600-LU705-CHI (March 27, 1991) (finding aggressive threat to “kick their ass” made in a menacing manner to be harassment in violation of the Rules).
While we find Bruno’s[6] behavior (and Gonzalez’s – although the protestor did not file a protest against her) to be loud, aggressive, and rude, it does not meet the level of prohibited conduct under the Rules. Additionally, although Ransom and Thompson chose to cut their campaigning a little short to de-escalate the situation, by the time Bruno and Gonzalez yelled at them, they had already spoken to almost all of the drivers and warehouse workers at the hub and passed out over 100 flyers.[7] See Yocum, 2000 EAD 18 (September 1, 2000) (denying protest finding that loud, rude and obnoxious behavior of union steward as member attempted to campaign was not unlawful but constituted an exercise of free speech that cannot be censored).
APPELLATE RIGHTS
Any interested party not satisfied with this determination may request a hearing before the Election Appeals Master within two (2) working days of receipt of this decision. Any party requesting a hearing must comply with the requirements of Article XIII, Section 2(i). All parties are reminded that, absent extraordinary circumstances, no party may rely in any such appeal upon evidence that was not presented to the Office of the Election Supervisor. Requests for a hearing shall be made in writing, shall specify the basis for the appeal, and shall be served upon:
Election Appeals Master Barbara Jones
Election Appeals Master
IBTappealsmaster@bracewell.com
Copies of the request for hearing must be served upon the parties, as well as upon the Election Supervisor for the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. Service may be accomplished by email, using the “reply all” function on the email by which the party received this decision. A copy of the protest must accompany the request for hearing. A copy of the protest must accompany the request for hearing.
Timothy S. Hillman
Election Supervisor
cc: Barbara Jones, IBTappealsmaster@bracewell.com
ESD 63
DISTRIBUTION LIST (BY EMAIL UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE):
Jesse Ransom
Jose Francisco Negrete
Eric Jiminez
Giordano “Nick” Bruno
Richard Hooker
Edward M. Gleason, Jr.,
David Suetholz
Will Bloom,
Ken Paff
Hon. Timothy S. Hillman (Ret.)
Paul Dever
Thomas Kokalas
Kelly Hogan
[1] The protest does not list Gonzalez as a respondent.
[2] Ranson was nominated for Delegate at the Local 952 nomination meeting on February 6, 2026, but was later deemed to be ineligible. See Eligibility of Herbert & Ransom, 2026 ESD 50 (Feb. 26, 2026).
[3] Another witness, a UPS supervisor, declined to provide a witness statement. Security told to Ransom that a security camera captured video of the incident but did not respond to an OES request for an interview. Security later advised Ransom to go through labor-management to obtain access to any incident report and/or security footage. As of the date of the issuance of this decision, we have not obtained or been able to review the video.
[4] Ransom stated that one of the stewards there (name unknown) later apologized to Ransom, acknowledging that the confrontation was wrong.
[5] Bruno was hired as a Business Agent by Local 952’s Secretary Treasurer, Eric Jimenez, in March 2020. Prior to that, he was a member of Local 63 while employed by UPS as a package car driver and other positions between 1990 and 2017.
[6] The protestor listed Jiminez as a subject of the protest but does not allege any facts, let alone, provide evidence to support a finding that Jiminez was involved in this incident or violated the Rules. We, therefore, deny the protest against Jiminez.
[7] Ransom stated that by leaving at this time, they may have missed the opportunity to speak to only about a handful of members.