Salame, 2026 ESD 29
OFFICE OF THE ELECTION SUPERVISOR
for the
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS
IN RE: SALAME, MURWAN ) Protest Decision 2026 ESD 29
)
) Issued: January 13, 2026
)
Protestor. ) OES Case No. P-041-121125
)
)
)
INTRODUCTION
Murwan Salame, member of Local 31 and Business Agent, filed a protest against Catherina Gastaldello, member of Local 31 and shop steward, pursuant to Article XIII, Section 2(b) of the Rules for the 2025-2026 International Brotherhood of Teamsters International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Rules”). Salame alleges that Gastaldello made defamatory statements about him following a general membership meeting.
The Office of Election Supervisor’s Jack Sullens investigated this protest. The investigation included interviews of protestor Salame, Caley Fieldhouse, Meaghan Shulist, Zeania Mizan, Jennifer Wallace, Stan Hennessey, and Catherine Gastaldello.[1]
BACKGROUND
Pursuant to Local 31’s Local Union Election Plan (“LUEP”), the nomination meeting for Local 31’s delegates and alternate delegates to the IBT Convention is scheduled for January 14, 2026. Ten delegates and four alternate delegates are to be elected. Ballots will be mailed February 13, 2026, and the ballot count will be conducted on March 9, 2026. Although the nomination meeting has not yet occurred, Salame and Hennessy are expected to be nominated as candidates for delegate on one slate and Gastaldello is expected to be nominated for candidate for delegate on a different slate.
A general membership meeting was held on December 10, 2025, on Annacis Island from about 7-8 pm as part of Local 31’s official union business. There is no evidence that the International Brotherhood of Teamsters International Union Delegate and Officer Election (“Election”) was on the agenda or discussed during the meeting. During the meeting Salame delivered his Business Agent report which included updates related to organizing the Vancouver Police Department (VPD) and Metro Vancouver Regional District for the prior month. Salame recognized Metro Vancouver shop stewards, Zeenia Mizan and Meagan Shulist, for their active and constructive support of members at Metro Vancouver work site. He did not recognize Gastaldello, who is also a shop steward. Salame explained that his remarks were specific to the Metro Vancouver worksite and that Gastaldello is not employed there.
After the meeting, Salame, Caley Fieldhouse, Meaghan Shulist, and Zeenia Mizan walked from the meeting hall to the far end of the walkway outside the hall. After a short time, Gastaldello exited the meeting hall and walked past the group. She states that as she passed the group, she heard a sound that led her to believe that someone in the group spit at, or towards her. She did not see who did this but her immediate response was to exclaim out loud, “that is gross and disgusting.”
The four individuals in the group each provided similar statements including denying that anyone in the group made any inappropriate gesture towards Gastaldello. The witnesses stated that as they were speaking with one another, Gastaldello walked by. Salame’s back was facing Gastaldello. . Some of the witnesses said that Gastaldello uttered an unintelligible comment but other than that, there was no interaction between the group and Gastaldello. They also confirmed that there were no other people on the path between the union hall and the parking other than them and Gastaldello as she walked by.
Following this incident, Gastaldello states that she subsequently walked back to the meeting hall and reported it to Hennessey as Local 31’s President. She identified the four individuals in the group whom she believed had engaged in this conduct. She unequivocally denies accusing Salame or any specific individual as being the one who engaged in the inappropriate conduct because she did not see who did it. Hennessy disputes this.
When Salame was asked why he believes this protest is related to the Election he stated that the timing of Gastaldello’s allegation was “suspect and highly prejuci[al].” He explained that her accusation was made on December 10, 2025, “at a moment when the Local Union 31 delegate election [wa]s entering its most sensitive phase—one month before nominations.” Based on this context, he explained, “I have a serious concern that this degrading accusation is reasonably likely to spread quickly among members and to chill support for my candidacy and the Stan Hennessy Teamsters United Slate 2026. Unless corrected promptly, the allegation will cause immediate and irreparable election harm during the nomination period and could materially affect the fairness of the election environment.” None of the witnesses interviewed, including witnesses Salame identified, provided any evidence to support Salame’s assertions. No of the witnesses stated that this protest or the events leading up to it were related to or impacted the Election. Salame did not provide any evidence to support his allegations and concerns about damage to his political reputation.
ANALYSIS
The Rules “are designed to provide for fair, honest, open and informed elections so as to permit the Election Supervisor to certify the election results in the International Union Delegate and Officer Election.” Preamble of the Rules. The Election Supervisor’s authority to supervise the electoral process “is limited to the nomination and election of International Convention delegates and alternate delegates and the nomination and election of International Officers. Id. We find that the Election Supervisor does not have jurisdiction over this matter because “it raises no issue with respect to the exercise of rights under the Rules[.]” Nelson et al., 2006 ESD 317 (July 9, 2006). There is no evidence that any of the alleged misconduct arises from the denial or interference of any right to participate in the Election process or is otherwise related to the Local 31’s election of delegates to the IBT Convention or the Election.
The underlying conduct that Gastaldello allegedly accused Salame of occurred following a general membership meeting conducted as part of Local 31’s official union business entirely unrelated to the Election, which Salame admits. There is no evidence that Salame was exercising any of his rights protected by the Rules at the time of the incident. The Election was not on the agenda for the meeting and was not brought up during the meeting.. None of the witnesses stated that any words were exchanged during the underlying interaction to connect this conduct or Gastaldello’s subsequent comments or accusations about it to the Election. Nor have we been provided any evidence to show that Gastaldello’s alleged defamatory statement was made with any intent to impact the Election. All we have to connect the conduct alleged in this protest to the Election is Salame’s conclusory statements that Gastaldello was “politically motivated,” and that her actions were “directly related to the upcoming 2026 Teamsters International Delegate and officer Election.” Not only does Gastaldello vehemently deny such bare accusations but, these conclusory statements, even in addition to the fact that Salame and Gastaldello are expected to be nominated as candidates for delegate on opposing slates, are insufficient to establish that the Election Supervisor has authority over the conduct alleged. It is telling that when asked how this conduct fell within the Election Supervisor’s purview, Salame merely speculated that somehow the timing—one month before the nomination meeting—demonstrated that an accusation that was made absent any connection to the Election whatsoever that was—as far as the evidence goes—reported to only a handful of individuals who were present at the time, was politically motivated. He further speculated about some potential future harm that may impact his and Hennessy’s support for candidacy but did not provide any evidence of such harm. The Election Supervisor has repeatedly held that assumptions are insufficient to establish a violation of the Rules, and we apply that same logic here in the context of jurisdiction. See e.g., Morales & Medina, 2021 ESD 77, 2021 ESD 77 (Mar. 10, 2021).
Accordingly, we DENY this protest.
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
2026 ESD 29
DISTRIBUTION LIST (BY EMAIL UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE):
Catherine Gastaldello
Edward M. Gleason, Jr.,
Richard Hooker
David Suetholz
Will Bloom
Ken Paff
Thomas Kokalas
Timothy S. Hillman
Paul Dever
Jack Sullens
Kelly Hogan
[1] Mark Bethel, member of Local 31, expected to be nominated as a candidate for delegate on the same slate as Gastaldello, was present during Gastaldello’s interview.