Stallworth, 2026 ESD 116
OFFICE OF THE ELECTION SUPERVISOR
for the
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS
)
IN RE: AUBRY ) Protest Decision 2026 ESD 116
STALLWORTH, )
) Issued: July 25, 2026
Protester. )
) OES Case No. P-152-051626
)
)
INTRODUCTION
Aubry Stallworth, a member of Teamsters Local 20 and a candidate for International Trustee on the Fearless Slate in the International Brotherhood of Teamsters (“IBT”) election, filed this protest against Local 20 and its President, Mark Schmiehausen, and Secretary-Treasurer, Paul Konwinski. Stallworth alleges that Local 20, Schmiehausen and Konwinski retaliated against him for running for International Trustee by denying a request that Local 20 fund his travel and that of the eight other members of the Executive Board of the Toledo Chapter of the Teamsters National Black Caucus (“TNBC”) to attend the TNBC’s Annual Educational Conference, in violation of the Rules for the 2025-2026 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”).
Denise Ventura of the Office of the Election Supervisor (“OES”) investigated this protest.
BACKGROUND & INVESTIGATION
The OES interviewed Aubry Stallworth, Mark Schmiehausen and Paul Konwinski, and reviewed videos and pictures posted to the Toledo Chapter of the TNBC’s Facebook page, as well as two exhibits filed by Stallworth; a May 15, 2026 letter from Konwinski to Stallworth, and a May 15, 2026 letter from Local 20’s legal counsel, John Doll, to Schmiehausen. Based on the evidence gathered, the OES finds the following facts. Schmiehausen and Konwinski took office in 2020. In 2022, they were asked if they would send the eight members of the Toledo Chapter of the TNBC’s Executive Board to the TNBC Annual Educational Conference. The matter was brought before the Local 20 Executive Board, which agreed to do this. The annual practice continued to be approved until this year, and included covering the following expenses for each of the eight or nine members of the Executive Board of the Toledo Chapter of the TNBC: round trip airfare; five-day hotel stay; a total of $1,000 per diem; lost wages for up to 40 hours (pay for 5 days); four TNBC T-shirts; round-trip baggage fees; convention registration and fees; and, shuttle to and from the airport.
This year, a request was made for Local 20 to again pay for the nine members of the Executive Board of the Toledo Chapter of the TNBC, including Stallworth, to attend the TNBC Annual Educational Conference. Stallworth is a member of Local 20, the President of the Toledo Chapter of the TNBC, and was a member of the Fearless Slate running for Trustee at the IBT Convention in June.[1] On March 14, 2026, the Toledo Chapter of the TNBC held a rally in support of the Fearless Slate and Stallworth. Videos and pictures posted on the Toledo Chapter of the TNBC’s Facebook page indicate support for other members of the Fearless Slate for General President and Vice-President at Large of the IBT and for members of the Sleeping Giant Slate in Local 20’s officer election, which Stallworth was a member of.
Schmiehausen requested an opinion from Local 20’s attorney, John Doll, regarding the propriety of Local 20’s paying for the members of the Executive Board of the Toledo Chapter of the TNBC to attend the Annual Educational Conference. On May 15, 2026, Attorney Doll sent a letter to Schmiehausen, opining that in the present circumstances, paying the Executive Board members’ expenses and lost wages could violate Article XI, Section 1(b)(3) of the Rules, which provides that “[n]o labor organization, including but not limited to the International Union, Local Unions and all other subordinate Union bodies, whether or not an employer, may contribute, or shall be permitted to contribute, directly or indirectly, anything of value, where the purpose, object or foreseeable effect of the contribution is to influence, positively or negatively, the election of a candidate” (with several exceptions not applicable here). See May 15, 2026 Doll letter. In Attorney Doll’s view, because the Toledo Chapter of the TNBC’s endorsements of Stallworth and the Fearless Slate amount to “campaign contributions” under the Rules, Local 20’s payment of the Executive Board members’ expenses and lost wages “could, and probably would,” also be viewed as “campaign contributions,” in violation of Article XI, Section 1(b)(3) of the Rules. May 15, 2026 Doll letter.
Attorney Doll further stated that,
[a]s a subordinate body (caucus) of Local 20, the endorsement of the Teamsters Fearless Slate 2026 and Mr. Stallworth, by the Toledo Chapter of the TNBC may have already placed Local 20 in some jeopardy of being charged with a violation of the Election Rules. It is my opinion that Local 20 should avoid the possibility that paying the lost wages and expenses of the Executive Board members of the Toledo Chapter of the TNBC, which includes Mr. Stallworth who is a candidate for election in the IBT Election of Officers, could be considered of having the purpose of or “foreseeable effect of these payments” [sic] were to influence the election of a candidate.
May 15, 2026 Doll letter.
After receiving Attorney Doll’s opinion, Local 20’s Executive Board voted to act in accordance with the attorney’s opinion and denied the request to pay for the members of the Executive Board of the Toledo Chapter of the TNBC to attend the Annual Educational Conference. On May 15, 2026, Konwinski sent to Stallworth, by regular United States Postal Service and by certified mail, a letter advising Stallworth of the denial of the request by Local 20’s Executive Board. Enclosed with this letter was a copy of Attorney Doll’s May 15, 2026 letter.
Stallworth states that because he was away, he only received the certified copy of Konwinski’s letter on Saturday, June 6, 2026. It is not known exactly when he received the letter sent by regular United States Postal Service.
However, Stallworth’s written protest is dated May 24, 2026, and includes a CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE, which states, “I hereby certify that on May 24, 2026, a true and correct copy of the foregoing Protest was served . . . by electronic mail and/or certified mail…” on the OES, Schmeihausen and Konwinski. In addition, this protest was filed with the OES via email on June 5, 2026.[2]
Stallworth claims that the decision to deny the request to pay for the members of the Executive Board of the Toledo Chapter of the TNBC to attend the Annual Educational Conference was made in retaliation for his running for International Trustee on the Teamsters Fearless Slate in the IBT International Election. Stallworth further protests the use of Local 20’s funds to engage Attorney Doll as part of the alleged retaliation.
APPLICABLE LAW
Although the protestor does not specifically cite any provision of the Rules, he alleges that the actions taken by Local 20, Schmiehausen and Konwinski constitute retaliation in violation of Article VII, Section 12(g) of the Rules, which states:
(g) 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 this or any other Article of the Rules is prohibited.
Also relevant here are Article XI, Sections 1(b)(3) and 1(b)(6) of the Rules, which state:
(b) The following rules shall apply to all campaigns for nomination or election to the positions of Convention delegate or alternate delegate and of International Officer positions:
. . .
(3) No labor organization, including but not limited to the International Union, Local Unions and all other subordinate Union bodies, whether or not an employer, may contribute, or shall be permitted to contribute, directly or indirectly, anything of value, where the purpose, object or foreseeable effect of the contribution is to influence, positively or negatively, the election of a candidate, except as permitted by subparagraphs (5) and (6) below. No candidate may accept or use any such contribution. These prohibitions extend beyond strictly monetary contributions made by a labor organization and include contributions and use of the organization’s stationery, equipment, facilities, and personnel.
. . .
(6) No Union funds or other things of value shall be used, directly or indirectly, to promote the candidacy of any individual. Union funds, facilities, equipment, stationery, personnel, etc., may not be used to assist in campaigns unless the Union is compensated at fair market value for such assistance, and unless all candidates are provided with equal access to such assistance and are advised in advance, in writing, of the availability of such assistance. The use of the Union’s official stationery with the Union’s name, insignia, or other mark identifying the Union is prohibited, irrespective of compensation or access. Other use of the Union’s name, insignia, or mark by Union members, in connection with the exercise of rights under these Rules, is permitted.
ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS
On May 15, 2026, Konwinski sent a letter to Stallworth, along with a copy of Attorney Doll’s May 15, 2026 letter, advising Stallworth that Local 20’s Executive Board had denied the request that Local 20 pay for the members of the Executive Board of the Toledo Chapter of the TNBC to attend the TNBC’s Annual Educational Conference. Although Stallworth states that because he was away, he only received the certified copy of Konwinski’s letter on Saturday, June 6, 2026, Stallworth’s written protest was dated May 24, 2026, and Stallworth certified that he submitted his protest on May 24, 2026, indicating not only that he had learned of the decision prior to that date but had, in fact, intended to file a protest more than a week before he did. The fact that Stallworth also stated that he did not learn of the letter until June 6th but filed his protest the day before, further undermines his credibility as to the timing of his knowledge.
Pursuant to Article XIII, Section 2(b) of the Rules, pre-election protests “must be filed within two (2) working days of the day when the protestor becomes aware or reasonably should have become aware of the action protested or such protests shall be waived.” Because Stallworth did not file his protest until June 5, 2026, more than two working days after he became aware or reasonably should have become aware of Local 20’s decision to deny the request to pay for the members of the Executive Board of the Toledo Chapter of the TNBC to attend the Annual Educational Conference, this protest is untimely.[3] This is particularly true where we do not find the protestor’s statements about when he learned of the conduct giving rise to his allegations credible.
Accordingly, we DENY this protest.
Even if this protest had been timely filed, we would deny it on the merits. “To establish retaliation under the Rules requires three elements: 1) activity the Rules protect; 2) actual or constructive knowledge by the charged party of that protected activity; and 3) a showing that the protected activity was a motivating factor in the decision or the conduct at issue.” Parker, 2021 ESD 137 (August 13, 2021). See Bianchi, 2002 EAD 554 (February 20, 2002) (“To demonstrate retaliation, a protestor must show that conduct protected by the Rules was a motivating factor in the decision or the conduct in dispute.”). “However, the existence of a reasonable independent basis for the decision or conduct at issue is a defense to an allegation of improper motivation so long as it is not shown to be a pretext.” Parker, 2021 ESD 137 (August 13, 2021).
In this case, Schmiehausen sought the opinion of legal counsel regarding whether Local 20 could pay for the members of the Executive Board of the Toledo Chapter of the TNBC to attend the TNBC’s Annual Educational Conference without running afoul of the Rules.[4] As set forth at length above, counsel determined that, given the Toledo Chapter of the TNBC’s endorsements of the Fearless Slate and Stallworth, who was among those seeking funds to attend the Annual Educational Conference, paying those expenses and lost wages “could, and probably would,” be construed as a “campaign contribution” in violation of the Rules. May 15, 2026 Doll letter. In light of this opinion of counsel, we find that Local 20, Schmiehausen and Konwinski acted in good-faith reliance upon legal advice in denying the request to pay the expenses and lost wages of the members of the Executive Board of the Toledo Chapter of the TNBC, and did not violate the Rules. See Snow, P-368-LU25-ENG (March 6, 1996) (where evidence suggested that local union’s failure to fully comply with Rules was based upon advice of Election Officer representative, no evidence of bad faith on the part of union officials, and no candidates disadvantaged by violation, Election Officer found that “the goal of ‘fair, honest, open and informed elections’” was not undermined) (citation omitted).
We also find no violation of the Rules in the hiring of legal counsel to advise Local 20 on the propriety of granting the requested payments. See Lally, P-167-LU378-SCE (January 4, 1991), aff’d, 90 Elec. App. 36 (January 14, 1991) (the Rules “do not prohibit employer or Union contributions in support of resolving protests, clarifying the Rules, or otherwise furthering the fundamental goal of fair, honest and open elections.”) (citation omitted; emphasis in original).
For this additional reason, we deny this protest on the merits.
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.
Timothy S. Hillman
Election Supervisor
cc: Barbara Jones, IBTappealsmaster@bracewell.com
2026 ESD 116
DISTRIBUTION LIST (BY EMAIL UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE):
Paul Konwinski
John Doll
Richard Hooker
Edward M. Gleason, Jr.,
James L. Donovan Jr.
David Suetholz
Will Bloom
Ken Paff
Thomas Kokalas
Timothy S. Hillman
Paul Dever
Denise Ventura
Ellyn Lazar
Kelly Hogan
[1] On June 16, 2026, the duly elected and certified delegates to the Convention cast their votes for all contested offices. After the count, no candidate from the Fearless Slate gained at least 5% of the ballots cast by delegates, the threshold for appearing on the ballot for an International IBT election by IBT members. As a result, all candidates from the OZ Slate were deemed duly elected.
[2] On June 12, 2026, the OES called the Teamsters National Black Caucus (TNBC) to discuss this investigation. The call went to voicemail, where a recording stated that the mailbox was full, and a message could not be left. The OES then sent an email to the TNBC, asking that someone call back as soon as possible to discuss this matter. As of this date, no one has ever replied to that message.
[3] This protest is decided in the post-election context. Pursuant to Article XIII, Section 3(b) of the Rules, post-election protests are only considered and remedied if the alleged violation may have affected the outcome of the election, “except that any timely protest alleging improper threats, coercion, intimidation, acts of violence or retaliation for exercising any right protected by these Rules shall be considered and remedied without regard to whether the alleged violation affected the outcome of an election.” (emphasis added).
[4] We have no evidence that counsel’s decision was motivated even in part by retaliation.