Frankian, 2026 ESD 46
OFFICE OF THE ELECTION SUPERVISOR
for the
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS
FRANKIAN, JARED ) Protest Decision: 2026 ESD 46
)
Protestor. ) Issued: February 20, 2026
)
______________________________) OES Case No. P-065-020226
INTRODUCTION
Teamsters Local Union 431 (“Local 431”) is entitled to 3 delegates and 1 alternate delegate to the IBT International Convention. Local 431 held its delegate nomination meeting on January 8, 2026.
Jared Frankian, an employee of United Parcel Service (UPS) and member of Local 431, subsequently filed a pre-election protest with the Office of the Election Supervisor (OES). Frankian alleges that Justin Scott, the current President of Local 431, retaliated against him in violation of the Rules for the 2025-2026 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (the “Rules”). Specifically, Frankian asserts that he was removed from his position as a Shop Steward at UPS because he exercised his right to seek election as a Convention delegate. For the reasons detailed below, we GRANT the protest.
OES Investigator Charles Deming investigated this protest.
BACKGROUND AND FINDINGS
Local 431 is a general local union headquartered in Fresno, California with members employed by companies involved in shipping, packing houses, warehouses, disposal and beverage distribution. Those employers include UPS and Sun-Maid.
Local 431 was previously led by members of the 431 Solidarity Slate, including President Steve Sharp. In December 2025, the United for Change slate beat the 431 Solidarity slate in the local officer election to lead Local 431. Scott assumed the role of President of Local 431.
Frankian is an employee at UPS and member of Local 431. Frankian served as a Shop Steward at UPS since 2019. In September 2025, Frankian was appointed by the Local 431 executive board as a Business Representative, a paid position. Frankian supported Sharp and the 431 Solidarity Slate in the December 2025 local union election.
Upon assuming leadership of Local 431, Scott notified Frankian by certified letter dated January 1, 2026, that his employment with Local 431 was terminated effective January 2, 2026. In that letter, addressed to Frankian as Business Representative, Scott stated that the decision “is a result of the realignment of our organizational structure to better align with our future goals for the Local.” Scott further wrote that Frankian’s “skilled business representation for our members at Local 431 was valued,” and that Frankian’s termination as business representative was “in no way a reflection of your dedication to this office.” Scott made no reference to Frankian’s position as Shop Steward at UPS. Upon his termination as Business Representative of Local 431, Frankian returned to his role as Shop Steward at UPS.
On January 8, 2026, Local 431 held its scheduled Convention delegate nomination meeting. At that meeting, a Unity for Change slate of three candidates for delegates and one candidate for alternate delegate was nominated.[1] In opposition, a 431 Solidarity slate of delegate candidates – including Frankian – was also nominated.[2]
Four days later, Frankian received a letter dated January 8, 2026, on Local 431 letterhead and signed by Scott (the “January 8 Letter”). In that letter, Scott wrote:
This letter serves as formal notice that, effective immediately, you are removed from your position as Shop Steward at United Parcel Service. Leadership has determined to move in a different direction with steward representation at this facility.
This decision reflects the Local’s assessment of its current representational needs and expectations for the role of Shop Steward and is made in the interest of ensuring effective and consistent representation for the membership.
January 8 Letter (attached as Exhibit 1). Tracking records reveal that the January 8 Letter was mailed on January 10, 2026, and was delivered to Frankian on January 12, 2026.
Beyond the language cited above, Scott provided no other reason for the termination of Frankian’s role as Shop Steward in the January 8 Letter.
Investigation
A. Initial Interviews of Frankian and Scott
OES investigators spoke to Frankian on several occasions in connection with this protest. In addition to confirming the information above, Frankian informed the investigators that Scott and the Unity for Change Slate appeared surprised at the January 8 nomination meeting when the 431 Solidarity slate was nominated as candidates for the Convention delegates.[3]
On February 5, 2026, the OES investigator contacted Scott by telephone. During that interview, the investigator identified himself and explained the reason for his call. When asked why he terminated Frankian as Shop Steward, Scott stated that he felt that Frankian was “trying to undermine his leadership.” According to Scott, he believed that Frankian “was lying and couldn’t be trusted” based on a series of text messages that had been provided to him by Elizabeth Olved, a Shop Steward at Sun-Maid. Scott did not indicate during that first call when he had received the emails from Olved. Scott also did not provide any basis for his belief that Frankian was undermining his leadership or otherwise untrustworthy other than the text messages that Olved provided to him.
B. The Subject Text Messages
At the investigator’s request, Scott subsequently furnished four (4) screenshots showing the group text messages that he had received from Olved (the “Subject Text Messages”). Three of the screenshots depicted a group text conversation involving ten participants. In that text chain, on Friday, January 23, 2026 at 5:24 pm, former Local 431 Business Representative Mike Pratt sent a message in which he included a photo of a December 29, 2025 letter that he received from Scott terminating his role as Business Representative effective December 31, 2025.
After Pratt’s message, a participant in the group chat attached an image of a Local 431 notice, dated January 12, 2025, that had been posted at Sun-Maid. Only two messages attributed to Frankian, using phone number ending -1849, were included in the Subject Text Messages. First, Frankian attached a copy of the termination letter that he had received from Scott,[4] with the message “Same letter signed by Justin Scott that I was served with.” Frankian subsequently sent a message to the group stating:
1 of the business agents on new administration has already resigned from being business agent. Andre finch. Ironically he is running as a delegate against Robert. Ask yourself this question do you want a quitter to represent you or a fellow member that works along side you.
The final screenshot appeared to come from a separate group text. It does not appear that Frankian sent any messages on that text chain.
C. Subsequent Investigation
On February 7, 2026, the OES investigator interviewed Elizabeth Olved, the Shop Steward at Sun-Maid referenced by Scott. Olved confirmed that she had previously been on a group text that included Frankian and stated that she “didn’t like what people [in the group text] were saying and felt it would hurt the Union instead of helping.” Because of that, Olved forwarded a copy of the group text messages to Scott. Olved informed the investigator that she provided the group text messages to Scott on February 5, 2026, more than three weeks after the January 8 Letter was sent to Frankian terminating his Shop Steward position.
On February 9, 2026, the investigator again contacted Olved to confirm the date that she provided notice to Scott of the group text messages. Olved stated the first time that she remembers discussing the group text messages with Scott was “a few days before February 5.” It was at that time that Scott requested that she forward a copy of the texts to him, which she did on February 5. Olved informed the investigator that her husband, Ignacio “Nacho” Cardenas, was aware of the group text messages and speculated that he may have spoken to Scott at some point about the text messages.[5]
On February 10, 2026, the OES investigator again contacted Scott by telephone to address the timing in which he learned about the subject text messages. During that interview, Scott asserted that he first learned of the existence of the group text messages at the delegate nomination meeting on January 8, 2026. According to Scott, either Olved or Cardenas told him about the texts at that meeting.
On February 11, 2026, the investigator interviewed Cardenas by telephone. Cardenas recalled speaking with Scott regarding the subject group text messages but stated that conversation occurred later in January (he believed it may have been January 21, 2026). Cardenas stated unequivocally that he did not speak with Scott about any group text messages at the delegate nomination meeting on January 8, 2026.
Applicable Law Regarding Retaliation
Article VI, Section 12(a) of the Rules provides, in relevant part, that “[a]ll Union members retain the right to participate in Campaign activities, including the right to run for office, to support or oppose any candidate, to aid or campaign for any candidate, and to make personal campaign contributions.”
Retaliation or threat of retaliation by the International Union, any subordinate body, any member of the IBT, any employer or other person or entity against a Union member, officer or employee for exercising any right guaranteed by [the Rules] is prohibited. Article VI, Section 12(g). As the Election Officer has stated:
Since the Rules protect campaign activity as a personal right of members, the exercise of that right cannot be interfered with by labor organizations or employers, including the IBT as an employer.
Hoffa, P812 (August 16, 1996). Therefore, a union is “prohibited from using the electoral preferences or activities of its employees as factors in any employment-related decision.” Pope, 2000 EAD 39 (October 17, 2000), aff’d, 00 EAM 11.
To prevail on a claim of retaliation, “the evidence must demonstrate that 1) the alleged victim engaged in activity protected by the Rules, 2) the charged party took adverse action against the alleged victim, and 3) the protected activity was a motivating factor in the adverse action.” Cooper, 2005 ESD 8 (September 2, 2005). The Election Supervisor will not find retaliation if he concludes that the union officer or entity would have taken the same action even in the absence of the protestor’s protected conduct. Gilmartin, P32 (January 5, 1996), aff’d, 95 EAM 75. See also Miner, 2005 ESD 1 (May 27, 2005); Link, 2011 ESD 207 (April 12, 2011); Leal, P51 (October 3, 1995), aff’d, 95 EAM 30; Wsol, P95 (September 20, 1995), aff’d, 95 EAM 17.
Finding
In his Protest, Frankian asserts that Scott’s termination of Frankian as a Shop Steward at UPS by letter dated January 8, 2026, constitutes improper retaliation in violation of the Rules. We agree.
The first two elements to establish retaliation are clearly met here. First, Frankian engaged in an activity provided by the Rules when, on January 8, 2026, he accepted nomination as a candidate for delegate to the International Convention. See, e.g., In re Miner, 2005 ESD 1 (“The Rules protect the right of eligible IBT members to run for delegate.”). Second, it can hardly be disputed that Scott took adverse action against Frankian when he terminated Frankian’s position as a Shop Steward at UPS, a position that Frankian had held for approximately six years.
As to the third element – whether the protected activity was a motivating factor in the adverse action – the information available to the Election Supervisor compels that conclusion. On January 8, 2026, Frankian accepted nomination for delegate in opposition to Scott. Within 48 hours of that nomination, Scott mailed the January 8 Letter terminating Frankian’s position as Shop Steward.
When asked to provide a reason for that termination, Scott initially provided a vague explanation, claiming that Frankian was “trying to undermine his leadership.” When pressed to be more specific, Scott stated that his decision was based on the text messages that Olved provided to him that led him to believe that Frankian dishonest and untrustworthy. During a later interview, Scott stated that Olved and/or Cardenas had told him about the subject text messages during the January 8 nomination meeting.
Neither of Scott’s explanations withstand scrutiny. The only text messages provided by Scott to the investigator were sent by Frankian on or after January 23, 2026, almost two weeks after Scott sent the January 8 Letter to Frankian. Further, Olved informed the investigator that she provided the Subject Text Messages to Scott on February 5, 2026, and the first time that she spoke to Scott regarding those texts was just days before. For his part, Cardenas recalled speaking with Scott regarding group text messages in late January, again well after Scott sent the January 8 Letter. The investigator specifically asked both Olved and Cardenas whether they spoke with Scott at or about the time of the delegate nomination meeting about Frankian or any text messages. Both denied any such conversation.
Scott provided no other explanation as to why he terminated Frankian’s role as Shop Steward. In the absence of any such explanation, and based on the timing of the January 8 Letter, we find that Frankian’s acceptance of the nomination to be a delegate to the International Convention was a motivating factor in Scott’s decision to terminate his position as Shop Steward. We also conclude that that there is no evidence that Scott would have taken the same action in the absence of Frankian’s protected conduct.[6]
Accordingly, the Election Supervisor finds that Scott engaged in improper retaliation in violation of Article VI, Section 12(g) of the Rules and GRANTS this protest.
Remedy
When the Rules have been violated, the Election Supervisor “may take whatever remedial action is appropriate.” Article XIII, Section 4. In fashioning the appropriate remedy, the Election supervisor considers the nature and seriousness of the violation, as well as its potential for interference with the election process.
We order Scott, as President of Local 431, to immediately reinstate Frankian to his position as Shop Steward at UPS. We also order Scott to cease and desist from further retaliation in violation of the Rules.
We order Local 431 to immediately post the notice (attached hereto as Exhibit 2) on all employer bulletin boards, as well as bulletin boards at Local 431 offices, for a period of 30 days, beginning no later than February 23, 2026. Affidavits attesting to the completion of that posting, and identifying each posting location, shall be filed by Local 431 and/or Scott with the Office of the Election Supervisor by February 25, 2026.
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
2026 ESD 46
DISTRIBUTION LIST (BY EMAIL UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE):
Justin Scott
Edward M. Gleason, Jr.,
Paul Dever
Greg Friedholm
Deborah Schaaf
Exhibit 1
exhibit 2
NOTICE TO ALL LOCAL UNION 431 MEMBERS
The Rules for the 2025-2026 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”) provide that IBT members are to be free from employer retaliation for activity protected under the Rules, including the right to run for IBT Convention Delegate, and the right to campaign for IBT Delegate and International Officer candidates.
The Election Supervisor enforces these provisions of the Rules. After an investigation, the Election Supervisor has determined that JUSTIN SCOTT, President of Local Union 431, improperly terminated JARED FRANKIAN as Shop Steward at UPS in retaliation for his protected right under the Rules to stand as a candidate in the Local 431 delegate election.
As a remedy for this violation of the Rules, the Election Supervisor has ordered Scott and Local 431 to immediately reinstate Frankian to his position as Shop Steward. The Election Supervisor has also ordered Scott to cease and desist from any further retaliation against its employees in violation the Rules, and to post this notice for thirty days beginning February 24, 2026.
No one, including any employer, may retaliate or threaten to retaliate against you because of your exercise of any right under the Rules, including your right to stand as a candidate or your right to support or not support any candidate.
Any attempt to interfere or retaliate against you because of your political activity in connection with the International Officer or Convention Delegate election should be reported to the Election Supervisor at the address or phone number below.
timothy S. Hillman
TIMOTHY S. HILLMAN
ELECTION SUPERVISOR
1750 K Street, NW, Suite 200
Washington, DC 20006
TELEPHONE: 844-428-8683
This is an official notice from the Election SUPERVISOR for the International Brotherhood of Teamsters that must remain posted for thirty (30) consecutive days, and must not be altered or defaced in any manner, or covered by any other material.
[1] The Unity for Change slate consists of Justin Scott, Gilbert Prieto, Jeno Espinoza (delegate candidates), and Andrew Finch (alternate delegate candidate).
[2] The 431 Solidarity slate consists of Jared Frankian, Christopher Garlick, Steve Sharp (delegate candidates), and Robert Mejia II (alternate delegate candidate).
[3] Frankian also informed the investigator that Robert Mejia, the alternate delegate candidate on the Solidarity Slate, was terminated by Local 431 as a Shop Steward at Sun-Maid following the January 8 nomination meeting. Mejia has not filed a protest with OES as of the date of this decision.
[4] The letter that Frankian posted on the group text stated that his role as Business Representative was terminated effective December 31, 2025. It appears that two letters were provided to Frankian, the first addressed to the Local 431 offices in Fresno, CA and the second, later letter to a residence in Madera, CA.
[5] Like his wife, Cardenas is a Shop Steward at Sun-Maid. He is also listed as a Trustee on the Local 431 letterhead used by Scott for both letters sent to Frankian in January.
[6] To the extent Scott argues that termination was appropriate based on the existence of the text messages - even if unknown to Scott at the time of the adverse action – that argument similarly fails. Frankian’s text message constitutes an endorsement for Robert Mejia for alternate delegate, which qualifies as protected campaign activity. Rules, Article VI, Section 12(a).