Lyons, 2026 ESD 89
OFFICE OF THE ELECTION SUPERVISOR
for the
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS
LYONS, BRIAN ) Protest Decision: 2026 ESD 89
)
Protestor. ) Issued: May 26, 2026
)
______________________________) OES Case No. P-126-032026
INTRODUCTION
Teamsters Local Union 331 (“Local 331” or “Union”) is entitled to elect 1 delegate and 1 alternate delegate to the IBT International Convention (“Convention”). Local 331 held its nomination meeting on January 28, 2026.
Bryan Lyons, a member of Local 331 and candidate for alternate delegate, filed a protest (“Protest”) with the Office of the Election Supervisor (“OES”). Lyons alleges that Kevin Mayer, an employee of Kramer Beverage and competing candidate for the Local 331 alternate delegate position, violated the Rules for the 2025-2026 IBT International Union Delegate and Officer Election (the “Rules”) by directly emailing campaign literature to another Union member rather than submitting the campaign literature to the Local 331 Secretary-Treasurer for distribution. Lyons further alleges that Mayer violated the Rules by emailing the campaign literature while at work during working hours.[1] For the reasons detailed below, we DENY the Protest.
OES Investigator Joe F. Childers investigated this Protest.
BACKGROUND
Local 331 is a general local union headquartered in Egg Harbor City, New Jersey with members employed by companies involved in transportation and warehousing. Those employers include Kramer Beverages. Local 331 has chosen to elect 1 alternate delegate to the Convention.
Lyons and Mayer were both candidates for the Local 331 lone alternate delegate position. Lyons filed a protest against Mayer on the grounds that a fellow Union member had reported to him, verbally and by follow up email, that on March 17, 2026, s/he had received a campaign email directly from Mayer. Moreover, the time stamp on the email indicated it had been sent at 7:51 a.m. Mayer’s work schedule at Kramer Beverage is Monday-Thursday from 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. and, therefore, Lyons alleged that the email in question was sent during Mayer’s normal work hours in violation of the Rules.
The Local 331 delegate election was held on April 1, 2026. A total of 125 valid ballots were counted; and in addition there were 6 challenged ballots, and 3 void ballots. Lyons received 98 votes, defeating Mayer who received 27 votes.
INVESTIGATION
The OES investigator spoke to both Lyons and Mayer. Mayer, who had never previously participated in Union politics, acknowledged directly emailing campaign literature to another Union member while at work during business hours.
APPLICABLE LAW REGARDING DISTRIBUTION OF CAMPAIGN LITERATURE
Article VII, Section 7(a)(1) of the Rules provides, in relevant part, that “each candidate shall be permitted a reasonable opportunity … to have his … literature distributed by the Union at the candidate’s expense” and Article VII, Section 7(b) provides that any candidate seeking Union distribution of campaign literature shall do so by making such request “to the Secretary-Treasurer in writing.”
Article VII, Section 12(a) of the Rules provides, in relevant part, that “[n]o candidate or member may campaign during his/her working hours” unless such campaigning is “incidental to work” or is conducted during “paid, lunch hours or breaks, or similar paid time off.”
FINDINGS & ANALYSIS
The nomination meeting for Local 331 took place on January 28, 2026. At that time, Lyons and Mayer were nominated to run for 331’s alternate delegate in the Election. Ballots for Local 331’s delegate election were subsequently mailed out on March 2, 2026 and the count occurred on April 1, 2026. Mayer’s alleged violation took place on March 17, 2026, and Lyons promptly filed his Protest.
In his Protest, Lyons asserts that Mayer’s impermissibly emailed campaign literature to another Union member rather than submitting the materials to the Secretary-Treasurer in writing with a request that the Union distribute the materials on his behalf. However, while Article VII Sections 7(a)(1), (b) provide a method for candidates to distribute campaign literature using Union resources (which the candidate must reimburse), it is not the exclusive method. A candidate is permitted to email campaign literature directly to other Union members for which he has email addresses. Accordingly, the Election Supervisor finds that Mayer did not violate Article VII, Sections 7(a)(1), (b).
Mayer admits that he emailed campaign literature to another Union member during working hours. Accordingly, the Election Supervisor finds that Mayer impermissibly engaged in campaign activities during working hours in violation of Article VII, Section 12(a) of the Rules.
However, this protest is considered in the post-election context.[2] Post-election protests “shall only be considered and remedied if the alleged violation may have affected the outcome of the election…” Rules, Article XIII, Section 3(b). Mayer’s violation involved sending a single email containing campaign literature to one Union member while at work during business hours. Subsequently, Mayer lost the delegate election by a margin of 71 votes. Thus, the Protest does not allege any conduct that may have affected the Election outcome. See Rules, Art. XIII, Section 3(b); see also Evans, 2006 ESD 165 (Mar. 27 2006) (denying the protest as moot where candidate whose eligibility was in question lost the election); Montante, Post-9-LU317-PGH (May 15, 1996) (denying as moot voter eligibility allegations where he did not vote in the election).
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 89
DISTRIBUTION LIST (BY EMAIL UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE):
Brian Lyons
Kevin Mayer
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
Joe Childers
Esther Bachrach
Kelly Hogan
[1] Lyons has only challenged the timing and method by which Mayer sent the email- he did not challenge the content or any other aspect of the email.
[2] Local 331’s delegate election took place 11 days following the filing of this protest.