Skoog, 2025 ESD 15

OFFICE OF THE ELECTION SUPERVISOR

for the

INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS

 

 

IN RE: SKOOG, ERIK                      )           Protest Decision 2025 ESD 15

                                                )

                                                            )           Issued: November 24, 2025

                                                            )

Protestor.                                             )           OES Case No. P-018-101325-GP

                                                            )           P-019-101325-GP and P-020-102025-GP
                                                            )

                                                            )

 

INTRODUCTION

These three protests involve claims and counter claims, by and against, Erik Skoog, Jackson Kerr, and Brian Aldes in their capacity as Local Union 320 officer candidates and delegate candidates to the International Convention.

Erik Skoog is President of Local 320 and a candidate for delegate in the International Brotherhood of Teamsters 2025-2026 International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“IBT Delegate Election”). He is also a candidate for secretary-treasurer in Local 320’s officer election (“Local Officer Election”). He filed a protest against Jackson Kerr, a Business Agent with Local 320 who is also a candidate for delegate in the IBT Delegate Election and for secretary-treasurer in the Local Officer Election, pursuant to Article XIII, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the Election (“Rules”).^[1]

In P-018-093025-GP (“P-018”), Skoog alleges that Kerr attended a board meeting and sought campaign endorsements while on union time in violation of the Election Rules and 29 C.F.R. § 452.76 and that Kerr, or his campaign took and used a union list with member contact information without permission to campaign creating an unfair campaign advantage.

Kerr filed two counter protests; one against Skoog, one against Brian Aldes, the present Secretary-Treasurer of Local 320. In P-019-101325-GP (“P-019”), Kerr alleges that Skoog made a campaign speech as President of Local 320 at a shop steward seminar while on union time and denounced members political rights in violation of the Rules. Kerr subsequently filed P-020-1022-25-GP (“P-020”), against Aldes for using his authority as principal officer to intervene in the ongoing investigation of P-018 by reducing Kerr’s vacation by eight hours on the grounds that Kerr engaged in campaign activities during union time and in retaliation for Kerr’s candidacy.

Since these protests arise out of related conduct involving many of the same interested individuals they were consolidated for investigation and decision. Dolores Hall of the Office of the Election Supervisor (“OES”) investigated these protests. The investigation included interviews[2] of Skoog, Kerr, Aldes, various shop stewards including Christy O’Connor who is running on the 320 Teamster Action Slate, Nathan Britt, an alternate delegate on the 320 Action Slate, Jason Bird, Keaton Limper, and Mike Johnson, as well as Local 320’s administrator, Suzanne Slawson, and the President of the Minnesota State University Association of Administrative & Service Faculty (“MSUAASF”) board and candidate for delegate on the 320 Teamsters United Slate, Tyler Treptow-Bowman. Additionally, the investigation included review and analysis of all materials submitted by the interested parties and witnesses in connection to these protests.[3]

BACKGROUND

The nomination meeting for Local 320’s Local Officer Election and the IBT Delegate Election was held on November 1, 2025. Two slates have been formed at Local 320 for its Local Officer Election and IBT Delegate Election, which are being conducted concurrently. The ballots for the Local Officer Election were mailed on November 7, 2025, with a ballot count scheduled for December 5, 2025. The ballots for the IBT Delegate Election are scheduled to be mailed on December 1, 2025, with a ballot count on December 29, 2025.

The 320 Teamsters United slate (“320 Teamsters United Slate”) headed by Skoog-Loahr, consists mostly of current Local 320 officers. Skoog is running for Secretary Treasurer, Loahr is running for President, Gus Froemke is running for Vice President, Marika Olivier is running for Recording Secretary, and Jill Nitke-Scott, Andrea Anderson, and Joe Brown are running as trustees on this slate. All of these individuals were also nominated as candidates on the 320 Teamsters United Slate for the IBT Delegate Election at the nomination meeting on November 1, 2025. Aldes is retiring as Secretary-Treasurer but has stated that he has been “grooming” Skoog to take over as Secretary-Treasurer of Local 320.

The 320 Teamster Action slate (“320 Teamster Action Slate”) includes Kerr, who is running for Secretary Treasurer, Steve Tesfagiorgis, Mike Moris, Christy O’Connor, Curtis Marquardt, Sergio Garcia, and Bart Dam. All of these individuals, with the exception of Dam, were also nominated as candidates at the nomination meeting and are running in the IBT Delegate Election on the 320 Teamster Action Slate.

Both Skoog and Kerr stated that at this time, they were campaigning for the Local Officer Election—not the IBT Delegate Election. The campaign materials, slate websites, Facebook pages, and witness statements all corroborate these statements. For example, the 320 Teamsters United Slate website is specifically directed towards the Local Officer Election. See https://320teamstersunited.org/ . The website specifically states each position the candidates are running for in the Local Officer Election. On the “Frequently Asked Questions” page is states:

Notably, only the ballots for the Local Officer Election are counted on December 5, 2025. The ballots for the IBT Delegate Election will be counted on December 29, 2025. See Local 320 LUEP (https://www.ibtvote.org/forms/ElectionPlan/ViewPlan/27169 ).

Also on the 320 Teamsters United slate website, under the question: “What is the nomination process” the answer begins: “The nomination and election of officers for Local 320 will be conducted in a manner that is consistent with Article XXII of the IBT Constitution and with Section 17 of the Local Union 320 Bylaws, as approved on March 1, 2018.” (emphasis added). It goes on to state, “This election shall be held in accordance with the Local 320 Bylaws, and the IBT International Constitution, and the election rules adopted by the Executive Board.” Similarly, in response to the question “How does the election work”, the answer begins, “Election for officers of Local 320 shall be by secret ballot, conducted by mail referendum.” Id. (emphasis added). There is no reference to the IBT Delegate Election.

On the 320 Teamsters United Slate’s Facebook page, there are images of the ballot for the Local Officer Election, as shown below, and no reference to the IBT Delegate Election whatsoever.

The 320 Teamster Action website homepage states, “you will be mailed a ballot to elect new Local 320 leaders” and “320 Teamster Action is a movement of members across Local 320 to win new leadership and a new direction in our union.” https://320teamsteraction.org/ (emphasis added). Additionally, it includes a giant image of the ballot for the Local Officer Election.

Id. It’s campaign leaflet states, “We’re voting YES to approve a better contract--and we’re voting for new union leadership and a stronger Local 320.” Id. Again, there is no reference to the IBT Delegate Election. Additionally, on the 320 Teamster Action Facebook page, there is a video providing a step-by-step instruction of how to vote that includes the envelope and ballot for the Local Officer Election posted.[4] There is also a photograph of the slate on the ballot in the Local Officer Election and no reference to the IBT Delegate Election:[5]

Kerr stated that all funds received by the 320 Teamster Action Slate have been used only to campaign for the Local Officer Election. Curtis Marquardt, treasurer for the 320 Teamster Action Slate, confirmed that all funds received or collected by the 320 Teamster Action Slate have been raised or spent in connection with the Local Officer Election and that no funds have been raised or spent on campaigning for the IBT Delegate Election. He went on to explain that the 320 Teamster Action Slate will open a separate account after the Local Officer Election if they decide to campaign for the IBT Delegate Election, which will depend on the outcome of the Local Officer Election.

During our investigation we did not see and were not provided any campaign materials from either slate in connection with these protests that directly related to the IBT Delegate Election.[6]

Steward Contact List:

Skoog alleges that Kerr and/or his slate improperly obtained a comprehensive list of Local 320 members and their contact information and used the information for campaign purposes.[7] Kerr denies this. On September 20, 2025, O’Connor left a voicemail in support of the 320 Teamster Action Slate for Todd Anderson.[8] Anderson stated that he did not provide O’Connor with his contact information and did not ask her to contact him. He asked Skoog and Loahr to ask her not to contact him again. O’Connor stated during her interview that she has been a Teamsters member for 27 years and a steward at large for part of that time. She stated that over time, she has collected over a thousand telephone numbers of individuals she has met and worked with. She further stated that she contacted the same phone numbers she called for Aldes when he ran for office for Local 320 six or eight years ago. She denied receiving a list of members’ contact information for her to use to campaign.

Local 320’s Shop Steward Seminar:

Local 320 held its annual[9] shop steward seminar at the Doubletree Hotel in Bloomington, Minnesota on October 10-11, 2025 (“Seminar”). A reception[10] was held for attendees on the evening of October 10, 2025. Local 320 hosted and paid the expenses of the steward seminar and reception including the travel expenses of shop stewards and business agents and hotel expenses for those who spent the night at the hotel. Skoog stated that approximately 130 people attended the Seminar and about 50 people attended the reception. Skoog and Kerr attended the Seminar on October 11^th, but Kerr did not attend the reception. Attendance at the Seminar is mandatory for business agents. Aldes stated that attendance at the reception is voluntary for stewards but mandatory for business agents unless they have “something special” going on keeping them from attending.[11] Kerr stated that attendance at the reception was voluntary.

1. MSUAASF Endorsement

MSUAASF is a separate, autonomous organization comprising of all the state universities in Minnesota with its own governing board of officers that has been affiliated with the IBT for 47 years. The MSUAASF pays IBT dues and is included in the TITAN system as members of Local 320. The MSUAASF board (the “MSUAASF Board”) holds quarterly meetings. It scheduled one of its quarterly meetings for October 10th to coincide with Local 320’s Seminar to allow members to attend both. Treptow-Bowman, President of the MSUAASF Board,[12] invited both Skoog and Kerr to address the MSUAASF Board on October 10^th to seek its endorsement for their candidacy in the Local Officer Election. On October 10, 2025, Skoog and Kerr each attended a meeting with the MSUAASF Board seeking an endorsement for the for Local Officer Election. Kerr and Skoog were each allotted one hour to speak with the MSUAASF Board. Kerr was provided the 11:00 AM slot and Skoog was provided the 1:00 PM slot. The IBT Delegate Election was not discussed during either of these meetings. President Treptow-Bowman confirmed that only the Local Officer Election was discussed but not the IBT Delegate Election.

Skoog and his slate members who attended the meeting with the MSUAASF Board took a vacation day for October 10^th. Kerr did not take a vacation day. He stated that he did not take vacation time because he made the presentation to the MSUAASF Board during his lunch break and otherwise worked in his capacity as a business agent the remainder of the day. Kerr stated that prior to his presentation to the MSUAASF Board, he worked from home, answering emails and phone calls. Emails provided by Kerr corroborate this assertion. Immediately following his presentation, Kerr went to a parking lot and participated in a remote Zoom hearing for a suspension discipline for an employee at the University of Minnesota bargaining unit, Crookston campus. The Crookston campus is located in northwestern Minnesota, an hour East of North Dakota. The Local 320 steward at the Crookston campus, Keaton Limper, was with the employee in Crookston during the Zoom meeting and corroborated Kerr’s attendance at the meeting, which began around 12:30 and lasted about 45 minutes. Kerr then participated in another remote Microsoft Teams investigatory hearing for an employee in the Hennepin County General Services Unit. This hearing began at 1:30 p.m. and lasted approximately one hour. Kerr stated that, after the conclusion of the hearing with Hennepin County, he drove to St. Paul to pick up Mike Johnson[13] for a scheduled panel discussion at the University of Minnesota, Twin Cities campus. Kerr was scheduled to pick up Johnson at 4:30 but arrived in St. Paul early, around 3:00 PM. Since he had some time, Kerr stated that he stopped by the Ramsey County Law Enforcement Center, located adjacent to where the panel discussion was to be held, and campaigned for the Secretary-Treasurer position in the Local Officer Election from about 3:00-4:00 PM, when he left to pick up Johnson for the panel.[14]  He stated that he did not campaign for the IBT Delegate Election. Johnson corroborated that Kerr picked him up around 4:24 PM and that they both were on the panel “Victory for Rank & File Teamsters Strike Summation Panel” held in Folwell Hall on campus beginning 5:30 PM. Johnson stated that Kerr dropped him off at his home around 8:00 PM[15]

Aldes stated that it is Local 320’s policy not to permit partial vacation days. He noted that all of the members of the 320 Teamsters United Slate who participated in the presentation to the MSUAASF Board on October 10^th took vacation time that day. Although there is no written policy memorializing a prohibition on partial vacation days, Slawson, who is responsible for tracking and managing Local 320’s time-off, confirmed that this practice has been in place for the approximately 30 years she has been employed by Local 320. In response to a pre-election protest filed by Skoog with Local 320 (separate from the protests at issue here), Aldes determined that when Kerr met with the MSUAASF he was campaigning on union time and directed Slawson to dock Kerr 8 hours vacation time.

1. The Reception

Skoog, Aldes, and Slawson attended the reception. Two witnesses, Britt and Bird, stated that at the reception, the 320 Teamsters United Slate handed out cards as individuals entered with a QR code[16] that invited attendees to a hospitality room in the hotel to meet the 320 Teamsters United Slate. Britt was also handed a t-shirt imprinted with “Skoog-Loahr”, referencing the 320 Teamsters United slate and stated that Skoog, Loahr and several other people were mingling around the reception room asking people for their support in the “upcoming election.” Bird confirmed that he saw Skoog-Loahr t-shirts being handed out but that he did not hear anyone actively asking for their vote or support.[17] Skoog stated that he personally paid for the hotel room where this after-party was held. Hotel receipts confirm his statements.

1. Speeches at the Shop Steward Seminar

Aldes opened the Seminar on October 11^th with a speech. In his opening remarks, he announced his retirement and then turned the seminar over to Skoog, current President and a candidate for Aldes’s position in the Local Officer Election. A copy of the agenda for the Seminar confirms that Skoog was scheduled to speak after Aldes. The title of Skoog’s speech as President was “Message on the Importance of our Stewards.” Skoog provided a copy of his opening speech wherein he extolled the virtues and value of the shop stewards, then discussed the value of “experienced leadership” and “proven leadership” being the backbone of Local 320. For example, he wrote:

But just like Stewards are the backbone on the job – experienced leadership is the backbone of Teamsters Local 320. It takes steady hands and proven experience to keep the Local strong – to negotiate, to defend, and to make sure our Stewards have the tools they need to win. Because when experienced leadership and dedicated Stewards stand together – there’s no force can stop Local 320.

One Shop Steward present at the Seminar stated he got the impression from Aldes’s retirement announcement and turning the podium over to Skoog that Aldes appeared to be “passing of the torch” to Skoog as Secretary-Treasurer. Neither Aldes nor Skoog referenced either election, slate or campaign.

Aldes stated that at past seminar’s he has provided the opening remarks then passed it over to Skoog to introduce the first speaker. A copy of the April 13, 2024 steward seminar agenda does not list Skoog as the second speaker. Skoog was, however, listed as scheduled to provide the closing remarks.

Skoog also gave the closing remarks at the Seminar and provided a copy of the speech he planned to give closing out the Seminar. A recording of his speech is not entirely consistent with the written speech Skoog planned to give, although some of the messages are the same. Skoog discussed leadership, employers and other “outside forces” trying to divide the local union. He highlighted how Local 320 provides training opportunities, is diverse, reflects the membership, and stated “I’ll be damned to have anybody criticize this local union or its leadership for anything less. Shame on you. These same forces want to burn your union down.” He went on to state that he won’t allow this—“not today, not tomorrow, and not on my watch.” He thanked the stewards for their work and discussed his experience as a former steward, truck-driver, and second-generation Teamster with union blood that “pulls through [his] veins.” Skoog noted that he “didn’t go to college and wake up one day and get a job. I actually went to college as I was going to work, as I was working for all of you. I earned my masters degree the hard way. I wasn’t born with a silver spoon in my mouth.” He claimed, “I’m going to defend each and every one of you as hard as I can and this is mission forward, rocket to the moon and we are kicking ass all the way home.” He then, again, thanked the stewards for attending.

Skoog stated that his speech was intended to address how labor, generally, is under attack. Two stewards present for the closing remarks stated their belief that Skoog was referring to Kerr in his closing speech. Skoog provided statements from about 15 people present at the Seminar who stated they did not feel that Skoog was campaigning in his speech.[18] All of them stated that Skoogs remarks were standard Skoog remarks and similar to how he has addressed members in the past. For example, witnesses stated that Skoog’s speech was “typical” for him, “representative of his signature speaking style,” “consistent with the way Eric speaks in all spaces,” and that the “themes and delivery were familiar to anyone who’s attended past meetings.” They described his speech as “a closing call to solidarity and strength in our local,” an effort “to fire folks up as a call to stand up for what is right in these times when we are seeing a fight against labor, and we need to stand united,” trying “to get us together to fight the good fight as a solid unit,” “focused on leadership, unity, and the strength of our local—the same values he’s always emphasized.” They also confirmed that Skoog did not mention any election or reference any candidate. One explained that when Skoog referenced “outside forces,” she believed that he was referring to the group Local 320 had just spent nine months “battling a decertification effort originating out of [her] business unit.”

In at least one Facebook post on September 27, 2025, Skoog discussed the Local 320 logo and how the 320 Teamsters United Slate represents the same things as the logo. He went on to write, “Some use the logo for their own agenda, placing members and their benefits in harms way. Some twist the truth and sling mud to get the attention off their lack of experience, lack of leadership and membership failures. Maybe if I was an inexperienced, immature, failed 24 year old college student turned business agent who wants to burn the world down through his radical beliefs and whose only negotiated 2 contracts, I might not understand or have these core beliefs either.” He further includes the hashtag, “#NotOnMyWatch” and “#SkoogLoahr320TeamstersUnited[.]”

Pre-Election Protests Filed with Local 320 Simultaneously:

On October 20, 2025, Aldes sent a letter on Local 320 letterhead signed in his official capacity as Secretary-Treasurer to Skoog and Kerr (the “Vacation Time Letter”). In the Vacation Time Letter, Aldes stated that Skoog filed a pre-election protest against Kerr for seeking an endorsement from MSUAASF without taking a vacation day—the same allegations set forth in P-018. Aldes determined that this was not incidental to regular union business activities and found that Kerr violated the “IBT Election Rules.” He further required Kerr to take 8 hours of vacation leave for October 10, 2025. A copy of the Vacation Time Letter is below:

Aldes sent another letter dated October 20, 2025, to Kerr regarding Kerr’s pre-election protest filed October 13, 2025, alleging that Skoog’s remarks during his speech at the Seminar were impermissible campaign speech (“Campaign Speech Letter”). Aldes determined that Kerr’s protest was meritless because Skoog did not reference his candidacy for either election and the themes discussed were “common themes within the union movement: the value of hard work, union before self, solidarity and fairness.” A copy of the Campaign Speech Letter is below:

ANALYSIS

Under Article I of the Rules:

Pursuant to Article III, Section 5(a)(2) of the IBT Constitution and the 2026 Election Agreement, the Election Supervisor has the authority to conduct and supervise the election of delegates to the International Convention, the nomination of candidates for International office at the Convention and the election of International officers. The authority of the Election Supervisor shall include the authority to supervise all phases of the International Union delegate and officer elections and to hear and determine, with the Election Appeals Master, any protests and appeals concerning the elections and, where necessary, conduct, overturn or rerun any phase of the elections. The Election Supervisor is authorized and obligated to certify election results.

See also Rules, Art. II, Section 1. The Election Supervisor has no jurisdiction over matters not related to the IBT International Union delegate and officer election. See e.g., Darsey, P-276-LU528-SEC (Jan. 24, 1991); Meyers, P-493-LU999-PNJ (April 4, 1996); see also Webb & Thomas, 2010 ESD 56 (Dec. 13, 2010).

In Webb & Thomas, 2010 ESD 56 (Dec. 13, 2010), the protestor alleged that the local union permitted political debates and campaigning in connection with the International delegate and officer election at two meetings in violation of the Rules. During the first meeting the protestor alleged that the question asked whether sending 10 alternate delegates to the IBT convention was a worthwhile expense for the local. A discussion followed but was limited to expenses and “did not stray into the political positions of candidates for delegate or alternate delegate.” There was also a discussion about the expense of a mail-ballot election for local union officers that was, again, “limited to expenses and not politics.” Then there was a discussion about the “political split among local union leaders” followed by express references to the local union officers election[.”] The Election Supervisor noted that “the delegates and alternate delegates election was not mentioned during this discussion.” Other union matters were also discussed. In her decision, the Election Supervisor noted that the “tenor of the statements” at the meeting “confirmed the political split on the local union executive board. However, the political references were directed expressly to the local union officers election and the decision the membership would make concerning who would lead the local union. The only reference to the delegates election concerned the expense associated with sending 10 alternate delegates to the convention; it did not devolve into campaign statements or rhetoric concerning the election of delegates or alternate delegates.” Id. The Election Supervisor found that the evidence did not support the protestor’s contention that a “debate or campaigning” concerning the elections the Election Supervisor had jurisdiction over occurred. Id. (“To the extent statements made by Gray and Roth stated political positions, those statements were expressly linked to the local union officers election and concerned who would lead the local union in coming years.”).

Similarly, here, all of the evidence, including, but not limited to, admissions by both Kerr and Skoog, witness statements, campaign materials, websites, Facebook postings, and shows that the conduct at issue here was directly linked to the Local Officer Election. This is consistent with the fact that the ballots for the Local Officer Election were mailed earlier this month with a ballot count scheduled for December 1^st whereas the ballots for the IBT Delegate Election have not been mailed yet. There is no evidence that the protests arise out of conduct directly connected to Skoog, Kerr, or their respective slates campaigning for the IBT Delegate Election. Contrast Bethel, 2025 EAM 1 (May 22, 2025) (holding that the protestor was “clearly campaigning” for both the local officer election and the delegate election where, the facts showed that in addition to being a candidate in both elections, the slate’s campaign literature referenced elections in 2026 and 2027 (aka the delegate election and local union officer election) and the petitions circulated during the campaign activity that was the subject of the protest specifically stated, “By signing this document, I support the Bethel Unity Slate for the 2026 IBT Local Delegates and the 2027 Teamsters Local 31 elections”) (emphasis added).

There are only two instances where the IBT Delegate Election is referenced. The first, is in the context of filing a protest with the OES. For example, Kerr specifically identifies Skoog and/or himself as a “candidate for Convention Delegate” in his protests to claims that the Election Supervisor has jurisdiction over them. Skoog similarly alleged that Kerr’s attendance at the meeting with the MSUAASF Board was to seek an endorsement “in the upcoming Local officer’s lection and IBT Delegates election. I also attended seeking the same endorsement…”

Notwithstanding this conclusory statement, as discussed above, during the investigation both Skoog and Kerr made clear that their campaigning was focused solely on the Local Officer Election. Their slate websites and Facebook pages corroborate this. Moreover, Treptow-Bowman, a witness we find to be credible, confirmed that only the Local Officer Election was discussed during each of their meetings with the MSUAASF Board and that no discussion about the IBT Delegate Election occurred. This is consistent with the statements by both Skoog and Kerr that they were campaigning for the Local Officer Election as it is their priority and the conduct of the parties throughout the duration of this time period.

The second time the IBT Delegate Election is mentioned is in the Vacation Time Letter and the Campaign Speech Letter. Neither of these references are sufficient to bring the allegations within the Election Supervisor’s purview. In the Vacation Time Letter, Aldes wrote that Kerr “requested endorsement of his campaign in the officers and delegates elections.” Our investigation found that both Kerr and Skoog only campaigned directly for an endorsement for the Local Officer Election. In the Campaign Speech Letter, Aldes wrote that Skoog’s statements at the Seminar “did not reference or mention his candidacy for the officers’ and/or delegate elections and did not reference your candidacy for the same elections.” There is no dispute that neither of the elections were explicitly referenced.

Examining the totality of the circumstances surrounding the campaign activity at issue here, as we must, we find that the evidence shows that the subject campaigning activities by both slates are related to the Local Officer Election only. Bethel, 2025 EAM 1 (May 22, 2025). Absent evidence directly linking the alleged conduct to the IBT Delegate Election, we decline to find that the Election Supervisor has authority. The Rules expressly permit local unions to run local officer elections concurrently with their delegate elections. See Rules, Art. II, Section 3(a)(1) (permitting local unions with a regularly scheduled local union officer election in the Fall of 2025 to also conduct its delegate nomination and election in the fall of 2025); see also Rules, Art. II, Section 7. However, the two elections are to be conducted separately, and the Election Supervisor’s authority is still limited to conduct related to the International Brotherhood of Teamsters International Union Delegate and Officer Election. See Rules, Art. II, Section 7(b) (“For those Local Unions electing delegates and alternate delegates at the same time as Local Union officer elections, the delegates and alternate delegates shall be elected in an election separate from the election of Local Union officers.”).

To exercise authority over conduct clearly and directly linked only to the local officer elections—which the Election Supervisor does not have authority over—simply because the delegate election is occurring concurrently directly conflicts with the Rules and prior precedent. Moreover, this would significantly broaden the Election Supervisor’s authority to intervene in local union matters based on the mere fact that a local officer election and delegate election were being run concurrently—as permitted by the Rules—absent any evidence of a direct link to the delegate election. Compare Webb & Thomas, 2010 ESD 56 (despite touching on the delegate election, the evidence showed a direct link to the local officer election and was not sufficient to establish jurisdiction); Kantrowitz PR-033-LU705-NCE, (Dec. 16, 1997), and Darsey, P-276-LU528-SEC (Jan. 24, 1991) (denying the protest because the Election Officer had no jurisdiction over matters unrelated to the IBT International Union delegate and officer election and any “turmoil” at the meeting “was related to intra-Union issues other than issues regarding or concerning the 1991 IBT International Union delegate or officer election” and there was no evidence that the remarks were based on the candidacy for alternate delegate or any other campaign activity) with Scherer, 2011 EAD 82 (Jan. 19, 2001) (the Election Supervisor had authority over conduct that clearly related to the delegate election); and Bethel, 2025 EAM 1 (May 22, 2025).

Moreover, were we to have jurisdiction over these protests, we would not find any Rules violations for any of the conduct alleged in the protests.

P-018: Member Contact List:

Skoog’s protest concerning Kerr or his campaign’s impermissible use of a steward contact list is denied. All of the evidence in connection with these allegations shows that the alleged conduct began late September. Skoog was aware of these allegations around that same time and no later than September 22^nd. P-018 was filed on October 13, 2025—about three weeks later. Accordingly, this part of P-018 is untimely and, therefore, it would be denied. See Article XIII, Section 2(b) (requires pre-election protests to be filed within two days of “when the protestor becomes aware or reasonably should have become aware of the action protested or such protests shall be waived.”).

P-018: Campaigning on Union Time

Article VII, Section 12(a) of the Rules prohibits any candidate or member from campaigning “during his/her working hours. Campaigning incidental to work is not, however, violative of this section. Further, campaigning during paid vacation, paid lunch hours or breaks, or similar paid time off is also not a violation of this section.” Union employees and rank-and-file members have the right to engage in campaign activity so long as they do not campaign on time paid for by the union. Parker, 2015 ESD 54 (Nov. 24, 2015). “[I]t is well established that campaigning during paid lunch hours or breaks is not in violation of the Rules. Hoffa, PR-016-IBT-NCE (Nov. 17, 1997) (citing Hoffa, P-865-IBT-MGN (August 26, 1996), aff’d, 96 - Elec. App. - 232 (KC) (September 6, 1996)).

The evidence shows that Kerr attended a presentation seeking an endorsement for an hour at 11:00 AM but that for majority of the remainder of the day, his schedule and activities were consistent with his responsibilities as Business Agent.[19] Based on all of the evidence before us including, but not limited to, the timing of the presentation, the length of the presentation, Kerr’s statements, and evidence corroborating his statements about his work activities throughout the day, we find that Kerr appeared at the MSUAASF Board meeting and campaigned during his lunch break. Since campaigning by union employees on lunch break is permissible, we find that Kerr did not violate the Rules. See Hoffa, PR-016-IBT-NCE (Nov. 17, 1997) (“Given Mr. Carey's position, and his schedule, it is reasonable to find that he appeared at the National Press Club during his lunch break…Therefore, even if Mr. Carey’s comments at the luncheon constituted campaigning, his act of campaigning during a paid lunch break in and of itself does not constitute a violation of the Rules.”) (citations omitted); see also Parker, 2015 ESD 54 (Nov. 24, 2015) (denying protest where activities by union employees occurred during lunch break) (citing Rules, Article VII, Section 12(b)). Accordingly, Skoog’s allegations that Kerr violated the Rules by campaigning on union time when he campaigned with the MSUAASF Board would be denied.

Campaign Speech

As discussed above, Article VII, Section 12(a) prohibits any candidate or member from campaigning during union time except for limited exceptions. Article VII, Section 12(b) of the Rules states:

All Union officers and employees, if members, retain the right to participate in campaign activities, including the right to run for office, openly to support or oppose any candidate, to aid or campaign for any candidate, and to make personal campaign contributions. However, such campaigning must not involve the expenditure of Union funds. Accordingly, officers and employees (and other members) of the Union may not campaign on time that is paid for by the Union. Campaigning incidental to regular Union business is not, however, a violation of this section. Further, campaigning during paid vacation, paid lunch hours or breaks, or similar paid time off is also not a violation of this section. An endorsement of a candidate may be made by a Union officer or employee, but solely in his/her individual capacity. The Union or a Local Union as such or the General Executive Board or an Executive Board of a Local Union as such may not endorse or otherwise advance a candidacy, even if all members agree on the endorsement or candidacy.

(emphasis added).

We would find that Skoog’s speech does not rise to the level of campaigning in violation of the Rules. Skoog discussed leadership, the importance of collective action and the union fighting together against employer and other outside sources challenging the union, hard work and his personal experience. These are general local union matters one would expect a leader to discuss. There was no explicit reference to either of the upcoming elections. Precedent shows that statements clearly referencing the delegate election are impermissible campaigning under the Rules.

For example, in Ostrach, 2006 ESD 355 (September 26, 2006), during the president of the BLET’s speech, and in connection with the IBT election of International officers, he stated, We’ve got another election comping up” and “We’ve got a guy from the Rail Conference, Freddy Simpson, who is running on the Hoffa slate, who deserves our support…When the BLE went into the IBT, one of the factors was its strong leadership.” The speaker also admitted that although he “could not specifically recall endorsing Hoffa or the Hoffa slate by name,…he conceded that his remarks stated his support for that candidate and slate.”

Similarly, in Smith and Leedham Slate, 2006 ESD 395 (Nov. 12, 2006), in response to a question from a member about who to vote for in the IBT International officer election during a meeting, the International Vice President of the GCC stated “that the [GCC] conference president is on the Hoffa Slate, so naturally we support the Hoffa Slate.” The Election Supervisor found that he violated Article VII, Section 12(b) by using his position as GCC International vice president to endorse the Hoffa slate and implying that the GCC as an organization supported that slate. Id.

In Hoffa, P-925-IBT-MGN, (September 20, 1996), the Election Officer held that when the President of a local union stated during his speech “we’re going to vote for Teamster leaders that put the members first” and referred to the general president and candidate as “our next general president” constituted campaign statements because it “advocates the election of a candidate[.]” Notably, however, the Election Officer did not find his reference to that same candidate “standing up to Corporations . . . greed, and . . . corruption”   as campaign speech.

No such reference occurred here. To the contrary, Skoog did not refer to either of the elections, his candidacy or ask for votes for himself or anyone else on his slate. Instead, Skoog’s remarks, which lasted less than three minutes, appear to be a general rally to members emphasizing the importance of leadership, standing together, solidarity, and collective action against employers and other outside forces. Such comments are not only common and expected at union meetings but, the evidence shows that these themes and Skoog’s statements were similar to Skoog’s remarks during past speeches before the election.

Skoog also did not expressly state Kerr’s name or otherwise reference any specific or unique or identifying characteristic. Kerr claims that because Skoog’s Facebook post accused Kerr as “twist[ing] the truth and sling[ing] mud” and characterizing Kerr as “an immature failed 24 year old college student turned business agent who wants to burn the world down through his radical beliefs” is the same theme as Skoog’s remarks at the Seminar that there are “forces out there who for their own personal gain want to spread rumors, tell lies, and create smoke” and statement that he “didn’t go to college and wake up one day and get a job” and “I wasn’t born with a silver spoon in my mouth.” Merely referencing some “other force” spreading lies or rumors, going to college, and being born with a silver spoon are too general to constitute attacking a candidate. We also note that Skoog, as the President, gave the closing remarks during last year’s annual steward seminar.

P-020 Aldes Retaliated Against Kerr and Interfered with the Election Supervisor’s Authority

            As an initial matter, Kerr’s protest against Aldes for requiring Kerr to take vacation time on October 10, 2025, was not timely. Kerr was notified on October 16, 2025 that Aldes reduced his vacation balance by 8 hours for October 10^th. Kerr did not file P-20 until October 20, 2025. Accordingly, his protest is untimely and, therefore, it would be denied.

Moreover, even if we were to consider Kerr’s allegations on the merits, we would deny Kerr’s protest against Aldes. There is no dispute that Kerr campaigned on October 10, 2025. However, as set forth above, to the extent Kerr campaigned by seeking the endorsement of MSUAASF at the MSUAASF Board meeting, we find that he did so during his lunch break in accordance with the Rules. Notwithstanding, based on Local 320’s longstanding practice that employees are not permitted to take partial vacation days, Aldes reasonably believed that Kerr had violated Local 320’s time off policy and was required to take a vacation day.[20] Aldes, as the principal officer of Local 320, has the authority to interpret and enforce local union matters, including enforcement of Local 320’s policies. Moreover, Aldes provided the same reasoning for taking this action against Kerr when he first notified Kerr about it, when he was first interviewed in connection with these protests, and his stated basis—a legitimate union business reasoning—did not change throughout the duration of the investigation. We do not find that there is sufficient evidence to demonstrate that this decision was pretextual. Accordingly, even if Aldes erroneously applied Local 320’s vacation time policy, we would not find that Aldes violated the Rules.

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

2025 ESD 15

DISTRIBUTION LIST (BY EMAIL UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE):

Jackson Kerr

jskerr6@gmail.com

 

Erik Skoog

upnorthskoog@gmail.com

 

Brian Aldes

Baldes@teamsterslocal320.org

 

Edward M. Gleason, Jr.,

ed@hsglawgroup.com

 

Richard Hooker

hookabrasi@gmail.com

 

David Suetholz

DSuetholz@teamster.org

 

Will Bloom

wbloom@dsgchicago.com

 

Ken Paff

ken@tdu.org

 

Thomas Kokalas

thomas.kokalas@bracewell.com

 

Timothy S. Hillman

thillman@ibtvote.org

 

Paul Dever

pdever@ibtvote.org

 

Dolores Hall

hall1000@cox.net

 

Jim Devine

Jim.devine@gmail.com

 

Kelly Hogan

kelly.hogan@nelsonmullins.com