This website uses cookies.
Office of the Election Supervisor for the International Brotherhood of Teamsters

O'Brien-Zuckerman 2021, 2021 ESD 144


for the



IN RE: O’BRIEN-ZUCKERMAN 2021,   )           Protest Decision 2021 ESD 144

                                                                       )           Issued: September 21, 2021

Protestor.                                           )           OES Case No. P-170-091021-NA



O'Brien-Zuckerman 2021, a slate of candidates for International office, 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 some 31 local unions violated the Rules by failing to produce worksite lists to the slate upon request.


Election Supervisor representatives Jim Devine, Dolores Hall, Deborah Schaaf, Michael Miller, Peter Marks, and Joe Childers investigated this protest.


Findings of Fact and Analysis


Article VII, Section 1(b) grants each nominated candidate for International office, among others, “the right to a current list of all sites, with corresponding addresses, where any and all Union members work.”  By rule, local union are required to produce the requested lists within 5 days of receipt.  As we said in Viehland2006 ESD 271 (May 23, 2006), aff’d, 06 EAM 47 (June 21, 2006) –


The purpose of the Rules provision granting candidates access to listings of current worksites in a delegate election is to level the playing field between incumbent local union officer candidates and candidates who are rank-and-file members. Where the former group, because of their duties as union officials, should know where members work and can use that knowledge to campaign, rank-and-file challengers, whose most effective campaign technique is face-to-face contact in employee parking lots, must rely on the worksite list the local union provides to determine where potential voters can be found. 


            The protestor established that it made written request for worksite lists of scores of local unions by email and fax in early July 2021.  It received worksite lists in response to these requests from many addressees.  For those from whom it received no response, the protestor sent follow-up requests in early August 2021.  Receiving no response from some local unions, the protestor filed this protest.


            Our investigators contacted the local unions identified in the protest, informing them the protest had been filed, further informing them of their obligation to produce the lists upon request, verifying that the email addresses and fax numbers the protestor used to make the requests were accurate, and seeking compliance with valid requests.


            Of the 31 local unions identified as respondents in the protest filed September 10, 2021, 23 transmitted their worksite lists to the protestor after receiving notice of the protest.  The local unions that did so by email or US mail are as follows: 104, 122, 137, 210, 272, 320, 331, 355, 386, 391, 396, 492, 517, 553, 630, 710, 812, 813, 831, 853, 896, 911, and 1038. Each local union was instructed of the importance of timely response to valid requests for its worksite list.  With respect to these local unions, we deem the protest RESOLVED.


            Two local unions presented proof that they produced their worksite lists before the protest was filed (Local Union 848, February 17, 2021; Local Union 891, August 13, 2021).  Further, Local Union 439 presented proof that it had never received the protestor’s request because the fax number the protestor used was incorrect; nonetheless, the local union produced the worksite list in response to the protest.  Similarly, Local Union 247 presented evidence that the protestor’s request was sent to a dormant local union email address that had not been monitored “in years;” despite this fact, the local union produced the worksite list in response to the protest.  With respect to these local unions, we DENY the protest, finding no violation of the Rules.


            Three local unions denied receiving the protestor’s requests for worksite lists because of faulty email addresses or fax numbers.  These are Local Unions 190, 315, and 665.  They have stated their intention to comply promptly upon receipt of a valid request.  OES has supplied the correct contact information for these local unions to the protestor.  Because of lack of proof these local unions received a worksite list request, we DENY the protest with respect to them.


            Finally, we DENY the protest with respect to Local Union 912 because that local union has merged into Local Union 853, which has produced its worksite list to the protestor.


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


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 144








Bradley T. Raymond, General Counsel

International Brotherhood of Teamsters


Edward Gleason


Patrick Szymanski


Will Bloom


Tom Geoghegan


Rob Colone


Barbara Harvey


Fred Zuckerman


Ken Paff

Teamsters for a Democratic Union


Scott Jenkins

Local Unions 104, 122, 137, 190, 210, 247, 272, 315, 320, 331, 355, 386, 391, 396, 439, 492, 517, 553, 630, 665, 710, 812, 813, 831, 848, 853, 891, 896, 911, 912, 1038


Jim Devine


Peter Marks


Joe Childers


Dolores Hall


Deborah Schaaf


Michael Miller


Bill Broberg


Jeffrey Ellison