| Home What's New? Facts Election History |
|
International
Christopher
J. Hanley – General Secretary Treasurer
Dear Sir
and Brother,
In the 2005 General Officers
election of Local 18, I was a candidate for President of Local 18, member of
the Executive Board of Local 18 (I won), and member of the Advisory Board of
District 16 ( I won a fourth term.) I
filed a protest of that election in accordance with the procedures specified in
the IUOE Constitution, the Local 18 Bylaws and the Election Committee Rules and
Regulations. My election challenge was denied. (At that meeting Business
Manager/IUOE VP Sink merely read the complaints as well as a response prepared
for the union, to the board members (16 of 18 who had received campaign
assistance from him). Neither my protest nor the response was distributed to
the Board members although I had requested that be done. Furthermore not one question
was asked concerning my and others election protest.)
This is my appeal of that decision.
My election protest, dated
1. Election procedures
were inadequate to ensure a fair election.
Those procedures included the following:
a) Business
Manager/IUOE Vice President Sink appointed the Election Committee Chairman, although
he was also a candidate for Local office.
b) The
Election Committee made various rulings improperly favoring the incumbent’s
slate.
c)
The ballots in the election were counted electronically. During the tabulation, several candidates
requested a hand count of a certain number of ballots in order to verify the
reported machine results. This was
denied making verification of the accuracy of the machine tabulation
impossible.
2. Meeting
attendance rules for candidates were unreasonable in several respects.
a) Article
XX1V (1)(b) of the International Constitution and Article XIII(12) of the Local
18 Bylaws state that candidates for office “shall have been in regular
attendance at all regularly scheduled Local Union membership meeting and home
district meetings held after nomination and before election, subject however,
to a reasonable excuse based upon good cause such as physical incapacity or
death in family.” That requirement is
on its face unreasonable. It has no intelligible relationship to any legitimate
union objective. Instead it unreasonably places limitations on
campaigning. Candidates for office have
to travel large distances to reach the membership and maximum flexibility for
campaigning is required. Candidates running against incumbents whose supporters
have access to all job sites and numerous methods of reaching the membership
are particularly disadvantaged by the rule.
b) The
Election Committee arbitrarily imposed a new requirement of written notification when a required
meeting was missed for “reasonable cause.”
c) Notification
of the new Election Committee requirement was not adequate to notify
candidates. It appeared only in the June
issue of the Buckeye Engineer, the monthly publication of Local 18. Delivery of that union publication is not by
first class mail and often late, particularly in many rural districts. Further, some candidates work for extended
periods far from their homes and do not have access to the Buckeye Engineer or
the opportunity to read it immediately. Mail
notification to the announced candidates of the new provision should have been
made. Instead, candidates were eliminated because Union officials failed to
disclose the rule to them although it was known they were relying on their
timely oral notification.
d) The
meeting attendance rule was not uniformly applied. Two meetings were held in
the period between the nomination and the election. Candidates who failed to attend the first
meeting were subject to the rule.
Candidates who failed to attend the second meeting, held after the
ballots were printed, were not subject to the rule.
As a consequence of the above, two
candidates (Bruce Bertle and Michael Lumbatis) were unlawfully
disqualified. The outcome of the
election in other races also may have been affected by a depressed voter
turnout.
3. Union
resources were used to benefit some candidates and denied to others.
a) The telephone lines of other unions were
used to support some candidates for office although barred by the International
Constitution as “outsider” support and by federal law.
b) Supporters
of some candidates were given up-to-date lists of union members’ phone numbers
not available to other candidates.
c) Union
representatives, on vacation to campaign, illegally campaigned on job sites by
claiming that they were there on official union business. Access to the sites was denied to other
candidates.
4. The ballots
were distributed from a distant location in
5. In violation
of election rules which prohibited access to the Post Office Box in which the
ballots were held until a date and time specified, some members and other
persons connected with the election were told in advance how many ballots had
been cast which gave them an election advantage of having information about the
election denied to others.
6. Observers
requested that ballots be counted as they were removed from the Post Office box
to provide additional security against the subsequent adding of ballots. That request was denied.
7. A tally of
the votes for Local officers by district
was denied in this election although provided in the past. A district breakdown of the reported results
better enables candidates to verify the credibility of the reported outcome and
raises questions about the outcome that was claimed.
Since these violations could have
affected the outcome, I ask that the entire election for all positions be
voided and that the re-election be conducted by the U.S. Department of Labor.
In the event that I am missing any
action, request, protest or any other action on my behalf, as well as on the
behalf of any Member of IUOE Local 18, that would make our appeal / protest
void for any reason, I request that you notify me immediately prior to any time
limits as to what action I must initiate, in order for my request to be given a
fair and unbiased hearing.
As Member in good standing of the
IUOE, as well as Local 18, who is entitled to full rights and privileges under
the United States Department of Labor, the IUOE International Constitution and the By-laws of IUOE Local 18, I
respectfully request that you give your immediate attention to this very
important matter.
Fraternally,
_______________________________ ______________________________
Patricia A. Kohl ~ Register # 2131891 Paul T. Gonter ~ Register #1747801
410 Stratton Avenue
614-582-1613 740-502-3724
_______________________________ _______________________________
William H. Roby ~ Register #1485164 Robert Scalesi ~ Register #1116578
Spencer, W VA 25276
304-927-4335 419-853-4584
_______________________________ ________________________________
Ronald Westfall ~ Register # 2105733 Frank Mazur ~ Register #
888-453-2123 740-543-4355
_______________________________
Christopher M. Miller ~ Register #2439691
Attachments Enclosed
Cc: General President Vincent Giblin
General Council Richard Griffin
General Executive Board
IUOE Local 18