Correia & Sanchez, 2021 ESD 100
OFFICE OF THE ELECTION SUPERVISOR
for the
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS
IN RE: DEREK CORREIA ) Protest Decision 2021 ESD 100
and JAVIER SANCHEZ, ) Issued: April 9, 2021
) OES Case No. P-120-032121-FW
Protestors. )
____________________________________)
Derek Correia and Javier Sanchez, members of Local Union 542, filed a pre-election protest pursuant to Article XIII, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the 2020-2021 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”). The protest alleged that business agent Dwayne Garrett campaigned on union-paid time and other business agents used union-provided transportation to a worksite where they campaigned.
Election Supervisor representative Bruce Boyens investigated this protest.
Findings of Fact and Analysis
Local Union 542 will elect 10 delegates and 6 alternate delegates to the IBT convention. The Members for Members 542 slate, comprised of rank-and-file members, is competing against the Teamsters 542 Members First slate, consisting of local union officials and rank-and-file members. The protestors here are delegate candidates on the Members for Members 542 slate.
On March 19, 2021, business agent Dwayne Garrett traveled to a UPS hub represented by Local Union 542 in Yuma AZ. Local union officials Phil Farias and Ron Cutitta traveled with him.
Protestors were also present. One of them took a series of still photos and two videos of activity there. Based on this evidence, the protestors made five allegations, each of which they contend violated the Rules: (1) that Garrett campaigned inside the workplace; (2) that two stewards held a campaign sign inside the workplace next to Garrett; (3) that UPS permitted the campaigning in the workplace and in the parking lot outside a bay door; (4) that UPS required protestors to wear safety vests while not requiring the same of opposing campaigners; (5) that Farias and Cutitta used union-provided transportation.
Investigation showed that Garrett’s purpose that day was to conduct union business. Video taken from the door to the workplace showed Garrett inside speaking with a member. Garrett told our investigator he was discussing a grievance. There is no contrary evidence. As Garrett spoke with the member, another member (apparently a steward) listened nearby, standing at an oblique angle from Garrett’s view. That member was preparing to campaign for the Teamsters 542 Members First slate. He held a placard, approximately 24 x 18 inches, bearing the slate’s name. The video showed that he handed a sheet of paper, presumably a campaign flyer, to another member who stood behind Garrett. The handing of the paper occurred out of Garrett’s view. Then, for approximately 17 seconds, the member positioned the campaign placard so that the member to whom he had handed the paper could see it. The video showed that Garrett turned toward the member holding the placard, appeared to see the placard, appeared to speak with the member, and the member reacted by moving the placard so that its message could no longer be observed. This evidence corroborates Garrett’s statement that he did not campaign in the workplace and did not condone campaigning there by others.
Although the video demonstrated that one member displayed a campaign placard inside the workplace for 17 seconds, no evidence substantiated the protest’s allegation that two members did so or that any campaigning other than that just described occurred in the workplace.
No evidence was presented that UPS was aware of and allowed campaigning to occur inside the workplace.
With respect to the campaign activity that occurred in the parking lot near the bay door, the protest alleged that UPS permitted it. Investigation showed to the contrary that UPS directed the campaigners to move from that location.
The protest alleged that UPS required the protestors to don safety vests while campaigning in the parking lot and that the opposing campaigners were not required to wear them. The protestors asserted that the vests covered their t-shirts, which bore a campaign message, and that they were disadvantaged for that reason. Evidence the protestors presented showed that the vests were eye-catching and drew attention to the campaigners and their campaign banner and tent where they distributed campaign flyers. In addition, at least one campaigner wore a ballcap bearing a campaign message. On this evidence, we find no material impairment of protestors’ campaign rights nor substantial disparate treatment of the competing campaigns to warrant a finding that the Rules were violated.
As for Farias and Cutitta, the local union officials who traveled to Yuma with Garrett, they are candidates in the delegates and alternate delegates election. Their travel purpose was to campaign, and they took vacation time that day. Garrett drove to Yuma in a union-provided car to conduct union business. No evidence was presented that Garrett campaigned that day, and he denied doing so. The protest asserted that the transportation of Farias and Cutitta to Yuma impermissibly used union resources. Article VII, Section 12 (d) provides that “Union officers and employees provided with Union-owned or leased cars, if otherwise afforded the right to utilize those cars for personal activities, may use the cars for campaign activities, provided no costs, or expenses incurred as a consequence of such use are paid out of Union funds or other prohibited sources.” We find that Garrett had a union purpose for the trip and his use of the union-provided car was proper. We further find that the transportation of Farias and Cutitta to Yuma was for a campaign purpose but did not result in additional costs or expenses to the union. Accordingly, we find no Rules violation in Farias and Cutitta riding with Garrett.
For these reasons, we GRANT the protest with respect to the member who passed a single flyer to another member and briefly displayed a campaign placard to that member inside the workplace. We DENY the protest in all other respects.
With respect to the Rules violation we found, we determine that Garrett immediately remedied it by instructing the member not to campaign in the workplace. We reinforce this remedy by ordering the member to cease and desist from further activity of this nature in the workplace. We order no further remedy.
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:
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, all within the time prescribed above. 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.
Richard W. Mark
Election Supervisor
cc: Barbara Jones
2021 ESD 100
DISTRIBUTION LIST (BY EMAIL UNLESS NOTED):
Bradley T. Raymond, General Counsel
International Brotherhood of Teamsters
braymond@teamster.org
Edward Gleason
egleason@gleasonlawdc.com
Patrick Szymanski
szymanskip@me.com
Will Bloom
wbloom@dsgchicago.com
Tom Geoghegan
tgeoghegan@dsgchicago.com
Rob Colone
rmcolone@hotmail.com
Barbara Harvey
blmharvey@sbcglobal.net
Kevin Moore
Mooregp2021@gmail.com
F.C. “Chris” Silvera
fitzverity@aol.com
Fred Zuckerman
fredzuckerman@aol.com
Ken Paff
Teamsters for a Democratic Union
ken@tdu.org
Derek Correia
Dmcorreia13@aol.com
Javier Sanchez
javstrz@gmail.com
Dwayne Garrett
dgarrett@teamsters542.org
Phil Farias
p.farias@teamsters542.org
Ron Cutitta
rcutitta@teamsters542.org
Jaime Vasquez
jvasquez@teamsters542.org
Michael Miller
Miller.michael.j@verizon.net
Deborah Schaaf
dschaaf@ibtvote.org
Jeffrey Ellison
EllisonEsq@gmail.com