Aguilar, 2026 ESD 82
OFFICE OF THE ELECTION SUPERVISOR
for the
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS
IN RE: HANNIBEL AGUILAR ) Protest Decision 2026 ESD 82
) Issued: May, 18, 2026
Protestor. ) OES Case No. P-096-022626
INTRODUCTION
Hannibal Aguilar, member of Local 396, filed a protest against the officers of Local 986 running for delegate or alternate delegate.
Deborah Schaaf of the Office of the Election Supervisor (“OES”) investigated this protest.
BACKGROUND & ANALYSIS
Aguilar’s allegations arise from a report issued by the Office of the Independent Investigations Officer (“IIO”) finding that certain Local 986 candidates for officer positions were not eligible to run in the last election and are not members. Therefore, they are not eligible to nominate second or run for delegate or alternate delegate to the convention. He requests that “any non-members who were not eligible to run, or who were nominated by non-members, should be removed as delegates or alternate delegates.”
Local 986’s nomination meeting was held on January 6, 2026. Its delegate election was a white ballot with 45 candidates total; 33 delegates & 12 alternate delegate candidates.
Aguilar did not identify any specific ‘party’ or ‘parties’ whom he claims are ineligible. Rather, he asks the Election Supervisor to investigate each of the 45 candidates, nominators, and seconders to verify whether or not they are eligible. It is not the role of the Election Supervisor to conduct general eligibility reviews.[1] See e.g., In re Eligibility of Wilson, et al., 2026 ESD 28 (Jan. 13, 2026) (denying protest absent specific allegations establishing the grounds for the protest explaining that such a general eligibility review “is not the function of protests”); See also Battiste, 2025, ESD 10 (Oct. 15, 2025) (denying request for a “general eligibility review” of “all candidates of the Unity Slate for every seat that is up for election 2025” to confirm eligibility). Here, protestor does not allege and specific allegations stating the grounds challenging the eligibility of any particulate individual(s).
Additionally, pursuant to Article II, Section 16 of the Rules, the Election Supervisor has the obligation to certify the election results which includes determining and confirming, as a matter of course, the eligibility of each person elected as delegate/alternate delegate and the eligibility of each person who nominated or seconded his or her nomination. Thus, each of the delegates, alternate delegates, and their nominators and seconders eligibility will be independently evaluated prior to certification of the election results.
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 82
DISTRIBUTION LIST (BY EMAIL UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE):
Hannibal Aguilar
hannizune@gmail.com
Richard Hooker
John Palmer
James L. Donovan Jr.
Edward M. Gleason, Jr.,
David Suetholz
Will Bloom
Ken Paff
Thomas Kokalas
Timothy S. Hillman
Paul Dever
Deborah Schaaf
Kelly Hogan
[1] We note that this protest is also untimely as the nomination meeting was January 6, 2026, and the protest was filed on February 26, 2026. See Uhrynchuk, 2001 EAD 151 (explaining that the definition of “action being protested” in the context of eligibility protests is the date at which the protestor learns of the candidate’s nomination not the date the protestor learns of the circumstances arguably affecting his or her candidacy) (discussing Millican, P-724-LU519-SCE (May 1, 1996)).