In the Matter of LIUNA Local 837
Laborers’ International Union of North America
Independent Hearing Officer
Order and
Memorandum
Sam Schillaci ("Schillaci") protests the nomination process of Laborers' International Union of North America ("LIUNA") Local Union 837. He alleges that the nomination process was in violation of provisions of the LIUNA Local and International Union Constitutions. A hearing was held by the Independent Hearing Officer in Toronto on June 6, 1995 ("Hearing"). Based upon the evidence presented by the parties to this matter, the Nomination Protest is denied.
1. This protest arises out of the May 7, 1994 nomination meeting conducted by LIUNA Local Union 837. Schillaci generally protests ". . . the way the whole nomination meeting was conducted." See Letter from Sam Schillaci to LIUNA General Executive Board dated June 16, 1994 [hereinafter "Nomination Protest"] at 1.
2. Schillaci objects to the seating arrangement and certain preliminary statements made by union officers conducting the meeting and claims that this was an abuse of their position and intimidated the members in an unspecified manner. Protest Letter at 1 and Transcript of Hearing In the Matter of Election Protest of Sam Schillaci (95-08P) dated June 6, 1995 [hereinafter "Tr."] 7.
3. There was no evidence presented, neither in the record nor during the Hearing, that the preliminary statements were improper or that any members were intimidated by the conduct. The statements had no affect on Schillaci's candidacy; he was nominated for an officer position. Tr. 9. [See paragraph 6.] While it appears that the actions about which Schillaci complains could not possibly have resulted in the intimidation of which he complains, Schillaci's claims are mooted by the fact that he was nominated.
4. Schillaci next claims that the Chairman of the nomination meeting should have read Article VI of the LIUNA Uniform Local Union Constitution ("Constitution") to the members. Protest Letter at 2. Schillaci contends that the members needed to familiarize themselves with the nomination procedure. Id. The LIUNA Constitution does not require that Article VI be read to the members and there is no evidence nor reason under the circumstances of this case that required it be read.
5. Joseph S. Mancinelli ("J. Mancinelli"), Manager, LIUNA Central Canada Sub-Regional Office, testified that Article V of the Constitution, Qualifications for Office, was read. Tr. 59. Hick Barbieri ("Barbieri"), Business Manager, LIUNA Otario provincial District Council, corroborates this statement. Tr. 75. Enrico Henry Mancinelli ("E. Mancinelli"), LIUNA Vice President and Canadian Director, testified that the Constitution was also explained in Portuguese and Italian. Tr. 67. This provision contains the qualifications for office holders and contains the basic requirements for elections.
6. Schillaci was nominated and accepted the nomination for the position of Sergeant-at-Arms. Tr. 9-10.
7. Schillaci was subsequently nominated for the position of Auditor. Tr. 10. Although he had accepted the Sergeant-at-Arms nomination, Schillaci argues that he should have been permitted to be a candidate for both offices. Tr. 12. (". . . as far as I was concerned I could be nominated for as many offices as I felt appropriate."). Schillaci's interpretation is incorrect and unreasonable.
8. Article VI of the Constitution states that "[n]o member may be a candidate for, nor hold more than one office, except where a combination of offices has been approved, in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution. Constitution, Article VI, Section l(g). At the Hearing, Schillaci conceded that he was foreclosed from being a candidate for more than one office having failed to obtain the required prior approval (Tr. 14) but felt under the circumstances he could decide which office he wanted. Id.
9. Because Schillaci first accepted the nomination as a candidate for the office of Sergeant-at-Arms, he could not accept the nomination for position of Auditor.
10. On May 26, 1994, Schillaci requested certain documents from LIUNA Local Union 837. See Nomination Protest at 4-6. These requests are not relevant to the Nomination Protest and need not be discussed here.
11. Schillaci was a candidate for the Sergeant-at-Arms position in the June, 1994 election. Schillaci was not elected, and did not protest the election.
12. Schillaci presented testimony about a 1990 agreement in which he was promised an office in LIUNA Local Union 837 in return for foregoing his candidacy at that time. Tr. 36. The issues of whether there was an agreement or whether it was broken are irrelevant to the determination of this protest.
1. The 1994 nomination meeting for LIUNA Local Union 837 was conducted fairly and reasonably in accordance with the LIUNA Constitution and International Union Constitution.
2. The members of Local Union 837 were presented with sufficient information to understand the nomination process.
3. Schillaci was nominated and accepted nomination as a candidate for the position of Sergeant-at-Arms. As he had not obtained the prior approval to be a candidate for multiple offices in accordance with the Constitution, Schillaci was properly precluded from accepting subsequent nominations.
4. The other conduct of which Schillaci complains is not substantiated or not relevant to the nomination process.
5. My review of the events indicates that Schillaci was fairly treated during the nomination process.
Based upon the evidence presented at the Hearing of June 6, 1995, and the documents and pleadings filed of record, the July 16, 1994 Nomination Protest of Sam Schillaci is denied.
PETER F. VAIRA
INDEPENDENT HEARING OFFICER