2026 EAM 14

ELECTION APPEALS MASTER

FOR THE INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS

            Protest Decision 2026 ESD 53 (“ESD 53”) was issued on March 3, 2026 (OES Case No. E-072-020926) by the Office of the Election Supervisor (“Election Supervisor” or “OES”).   ESD 53 addresses a protest filed by Courtney Tuckwood and Larry Yampolsky, members of Local 155 based in Vancouver, British Columbia, challenging the eligibility of Eric Mayervich to run for delegate pursuant to Article VI of the Rules for the 2025-2026 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (the “Rules”).

             On March 3rd, the Election Supervisor granted the protest and found that Mr. Mayervich  was ineligible to run as a delegate.  On March 4, 2026, Mr. Mayervich appealed the decision.  On March 5, 2026, by Notice of Hearing, the Election Appeals Master scheduled a hearing for March 9, 2026.  On March 6, 2026, the Election Supervisor submitted supplemental written arguments in support of its position.

A hearing by video conference was held on March 9, 2026.  The following individuals attended the hearing:  Kelly Hogan, Jack Sullens and Alexa Posliff, on behalf of the OES; Eric Mayervich, on his own behalf; and Larry Yampolsky on behalf of Local155. 

At the time of the hearing on March 9, 2026, Local 155’s delegate election was imminent.  Accordingly, I issued a decision at the hearing on March 9th, DENYING the appeal. This written decision supplements my ruling issued at the hearing.

Determination

Pursuant to Article VI, Section 1(a)(1)-(3) of the Rules, to be eligible to run for any Convention delegate, alternate delegate, or International Officer position, a member must satisfy each of the following requirements:

(1)                Be a member in continuous good standing of the Local Union, with one’s dues paid to the Local Union for a period of twenty-four (24) consecutive months prior to the month of nomination for said position with no interruptions in active membership due to suspensions, expulsions, withdrawals, transfers or failure to pay fines or assessments;

(2)                Be employed at the craft within the jurisdiction of the Local Union for a period of twenty-four (24) consecutive months prior to the month of nomination; and

(3)                Be eligible to hold office if elected.

Depending on the nature of their employment, members may not always be able to satisfy the second prong of the eligibility requirements, namely continuous employment at the craft for twenty-four consecutive months.  Accordingly, the Rules provide the following exception:

The active employment at the craft requirement may be excused by unemployment if, for the period of unemployment, the member was actively seeking and available for employment in the craft and not working outside the craft during such period of unemployment, or by active pursuit of an unresolved grievance or other legal action challenging suspension or discharge.

Article VI, Section 2(b).

In their protests, Ms. Tuckwood and Mr. Yampolsky alleged that Eric Mayervich was ineligible to run as a delegate because he had not been employed at the craft for a period of twenty-four consecutive months prior to the month of nomination.  The craft in which members of Local 155 are employed is the movie and television production industry.  By all accounts, the work is episodic in nature, consisting of temporary employment with various production companies as television shows or movies are filmed within the Local's jurisdiction. 

To accommodate members who are between productions and seeking new employment, Local 155 maintains a dispatch system through which members are referred to new productions as work becomes available.  Members are required to maintain their status on the referral list as “Working,” “Available,” or, if they are not seeking employment, “Unavailable.”  Upon the conclusion of a production assignment, it is incumbent upon the member to update the list to reflect whether they are available for new work.  In the event a member fails to do so, it has been the Local's longstanding practice to default the member's status to “Unavailable.”

As it pertains to eligibility, members who are not actively employed between productions will not be penalized so long as they are actively seeking employment.  In prior protest decisions involving the television and movie industries, the Election Supervisor has found that a member’s presence on a referral list demonstrates the member's willingness and intention to accept employment in the craft should it become available, thereby satisfying the exception set forth in the Rules.  See Funk, E-86 (February 20, 1996), aff’d, 96 EAM 107 (February 28, 1996).

As part of its investigation into the protest, the Election Supervisor determined that the Local had designated Mr. Mayervich as “Unavailable” from March 9, 2024 through June 9, 2024, following the completion of a production assignment.  Mr. Mayervich himself then called the union and affirmatively designated his status as “Unavailable” from September 13, 2024 through November 4, 2024.  In total, Mr. Mayervich was designated as “Unavailable” for nearly seven months of the eligibility period leading up to Local 155’s nomination meeting, and accordingly was not actively seeking employment within the meaning of the Rules during that time.

On appeal, Mr. Mayervich contests the Election Supervisor’s findings, asserting that he was available to work during the eligibility period.  He also claims that Local 155 maintains an inconsistent practice of updating the dispatch list and denied that he called the union to designate himself as “Unavailable” on September 13, 2024. 

Here, I find that the Election Supervisor’s determination properly weighed all of the evidence, including interviews with the individuals responsible for maintaining Local 155’s dispatch list.  Notably, the record reflects that when Mr. Mayervich is not working, he resides approximately 14 hours away by car from the Local's jurisdiction.  The evidence further demonstrates that on September 9, 2024, Mr. Mayervich was offered three jobs, all of which he declined.  Just four days later, on September 13, 2024, he affirmatively designated himself as “Unavailable” on the dispatch list — a fact corroborated by witnesses interviewed during the investigation.  Finally, although the union designated Mr. Mayervich as “Unavailable” upon the conclusion of a production assignment on March 3, 2024, he did not contact the union to update his status to “Available” for more than three months. 

Taken together, this evidence amply supports the Election Supervisor’s conclusion that Mr. Mayervich was not actively seeking and available for employment in the craft during the relevant period, and that he therefore cannot avail himself of the exception set forth in Article VI, Section 2(b) of the Rules.  See Eligibility of Duncan, 2006 ESD 55 (January 26, 2006); see also Eligibility of Tanksley, 2016 ESD 74 (January 17, 2016).  Having reviewed the investigation conducted by the Election Supervisor and the bases for its credibility determinations, I find no reason to disturb those findings.  See Hailstone & Martinez, 10 EAM 7 (September 14, 2010).

For the foregoing reasons, the appeal is DENIED.

SO ORDERED

Hon. Barbara S. Jones (Ret.)

DATED:         May 11, 2026
DISTRIBUTION LIST (VIA EMAIL):