In the Matter of LIUNA Local 1101

 

Laborers’ International Union of North America

Independent Hearing Officer

 

Docket No. 96-90P

Decided February 20, 1997

Order and Memorandum

This decision addresses an election protest filed by several members of Local Union 1101, Gainesville, Florida (“Local 1101”).  Floyd Gipson, Yvonne Anderson, Johnny Sheppard, George Strickland, and a number of other union members  (herein collectively referred to as “the protestors”) filed a timely protest with the Independent Hearing Officer (“IHO”) regarding the election of officers of Local 1101 held on December 12-14, 1996 (“the Election”).

The allegations question the eligibility of the incumbent president, A.J. “Tommy” Thompson (“Thompson”), to run for the office of president/business manager; the qualifications and preparation of the judges of election for their duties; the preparation and security of the ballots; improper campaigning by the secretary-treasurer; and allegations that the members did not have the opportunity to vote for district council delegate.

Based upon the hearing in which a representative of the protestors testified and further investigation by IHO representatives, the protest contesting Thompson’s eligibility to run for office is GRANTED.  The election for president/business manager of Local 1101 will be rerun, including the nomination process.  The other allegations are DENIED.

Findings of Fact

1.        All of the protestors are members of Local 1101, Gainesville, Florida.

2.        The election for all officers of Local 1101 was held on December 12-14, 1996.

3.        Various protests alleging irregularities occurring before and during the Election were timely filed by the protestors.

4.        The protestors alleged that there was an improper number of notices sent out regarding the Election. 

5.        Local Union 1101 sent two notices regarding the offices open for election, the date and time of the qualifications meeting, and the date and time of the Election.  Interview with Orain Jones, February 4, 1997. 

6.        These notices gave proper notice to the membership regarding the essential information concerning the Election and were in conformance with the Uniform Local Union Constitution (“Constitution”).

7.        There was no evidence that suggested that the notices were improper or ineffective.

8.        The protestors alleged that Jessica Hall, a judge of election, did not have a copy of the Constitution with her during the qualification meetings.

9.        There is no requirement that the judges of election have a copy of the Constitution at the qualifications meeting; although, it would be helpful. 

10.     The investigation reveals that Hall had access to a copy of the Constitution during the qualification meetings.  

11.     The protestors alleged that John Henry Williams (“Williams”) was not qualified to be a judge of election because he was the incumbent business manager.  Article VI, § 1(c) of the Uniform Local Union Constitution states:

[T]hree Judges of Election shall be appointed prior to the Nomination Meeting by the Executive Board of the Local Union. They shall not be candidates for office but they shall possess all the qualifications required of candidates for office except that they may be retired. 

12.     Williams was not a candidate for office in the Election.

13.     The protestors made the following allegations regarding the security of the ballots:

too many ballots were printed; the ballots were not prepared by the judges of election; and the ballot box was susceptible to tampering.

14.     An investigation by a representative of the IHO, including interviews with each of the judges of election, reveals there were no improprieties in the processing or security of the ballots.   The ballots were properly prepared by the judges of election and each judge of election separately confirmed the security of both the ballots and the ballot box.  

15.     The protestors alleged that incumbent Secretary-Treasurer Orain Jones (“Jones”) improperly campaigned and otherwise acted inappropriately during the Election.  The protestors alleged that Jones was present at the polls throughout the Election and intimidated voters.  They also alleged that, during the Election, Jones smoked cigarettes in close proximity to a poll watcher.  The protestors stated that the watcher, who was allergic to smoke, became ill due to Jones’s behavior.  

16.     The investigation revealed no credible evidence that Jones’ personal habits or presence at the polls were improper or had an affect on the outcome of the Election.

17.     The protestors alleged that the members should have been permitted to vote for delegates to the district council.

18.     Article IV,  § 3 of the Uniform District Council Constitution entitles each Local Union affiliated with the district council to a specified number of delegates to the district council based on the size of its membership.  Local Union 1101, with 500 members or less, is allowed two delegates to the district council.  Id.

19.     At a meeting prior to nominations, the membership determined that, due to the small size of the Local 1101 membership and financial considerations, only one delegate to the district council was necessary.  In accordance with Article IV, § 4(E)(11) of the Uniform Local Union Constitution, Thompson was appointed delegate to the district council by virtue of his position as business manager.  Interview with Orain Jones, February 4, 1997.

20.     The protestors also allege that Thompson was not qualified as a candidate for president/business manager because he was retired.

21.     In order to be eligible as a candidate for office, a union member must be “working at the calling” for the entire year prior to nomination.  Working at the calling includes “[e]mployment in a full-time capacity for the Local Union.”  Article V, § 4(b) of the Uniform Local Union Constitution. 

22.     In 1985, Thompson retired from his work as a heavy equipment mechanic for Alachua County and began collecting a pension based on this employment. Alachua County had a collective bargaining agreement with Local 1101 which covered Thompson’s job.  Interviews with Thompson, January 27 and 31, 1997.

23.     Since approximately 1987, Thompson has held the position of Local 1101 president, a part-time position with a salary of $50 per month.   Thompson was elected to the newly created, combined office of business manager/president. The position continues to be a part-time position, with a salary of  $100 per month.^[1]

24.     For at least the past two years, Thompson’s dues have been $5, rather than $7, due to his retired status, pursuant to Article VIII, § 5 of the Uniform Local Union Constitution.  Interview with Orain Jones, January 31, 1997.

Discussion

District Council Delegate Representation

It is the position of the International Union that a local union may vote to have less than its full allotment of delegates to the district council as long as the vote takes place prior to nominations and the Local Union is afforded some representation at the district council.  See Memorandum of LIUNA General Counsel regarding District Council Delegates of LIUNA General Counsel, February 13, 1997.  This position is in accord with federal law. ^[2]  Thus, it is not a violation of the Constitution for the local union to elect less than its full allotment of district council delegates.  If a local union fails to fill its allotted quota, the local forfeits those additional delegate votes.

In the instant case, Local 1101's vote at the membership meeting to send only one delegate to the district council was proper.  Further, the appointment of the business manager to be sole delegate position was in accordance with the Uniform Local Union Constitution.

The Eligibility of Retired Members to Hold Union Office

Retired members have been explicitly excluded from the definition of “working at the calling” under Article V of the Uniform Local Union Constitution since 1966 and are not eligible to hold office.  See Samuel Register, IHO decision, Docket No. 96-21P, Exhibit 1, Position Statement on Behalf of Laborers’ International Union of North America (June 27, 1996)(“LIUNA Position Statement”), p. 1.  The rationale for the exclusion of retired members was “to limit the field of qualified candidates for local union or district council office to those members who could demonstrate an active interest and involvement in the Union, its membership, and the Union’s calling.”  LIUNA Position Statement, p.1.

In 1985, Thompson retired from his work as a heavy equipment mechanic for Alachua County and began to collect a pension from a LIUNA-affiliated source.  Thompson’s position as an officer for the local pays $100 per month and is part-time.  Thompson works full-time at his cattle ranch.  Thompson has paid retirement dues since at least 1994.

The Constitution was recently amended during the 1996 International Delegate Convention to clearly define the term, “retired.”   Article V, § 10 of the Uniform Local Union Constitution states:

All of the qualifications for office must be present at the time of nomination, as well as at the time of election and during the term of office.

Any person who receives a pension from a pension or a retirement fund related to the International Union or any affiliate thereof shall be presumed to be a retiree and, therefore, not to be working at the calling of the International Union and not to be qualified as a candidate for office.  The burden shall be on such pension recipient to demonstrate affirmatively to the satisfaction of the Judges of Election that such individual nonetheless meets the constitutional qualifications for office.

A LIUNA member is presumed to be retired when he/she is receiving a LIUNA-affiliated pension check.  Upon receipt of such check, the member has the burden to prove that he/she is not, in fact, retired.  Another indicia of retirement status is the payment of retirement dues.   Thompson does not work at any full-time, LIUNA-related job; he works full-time on his cattle ranch.   His employment as a LIUNA Local Union officer is only part-time.  Clearly, under the forgoing analysis, Thompson is a retired member of LIUNA and is not working at the calling.

The investigation reveals that Thompson has been the lifeblood of Local 1101 since its inception.  LIUNA recognizes and appreciates Thompson’s many years of service to the local; the rules of the Constitutions, however, must be applied uniformly.  The local union is advised to consult with the International Union to determine how Thompson may be retained to consult with the executive board on union matters in order to take advantage of his vast knowledge and skills.

Conclusions

1.        No credible evidence was presented to suggest improper campaigning by Jones.

2.        The procedures involving the preparation and security of the ballots were properly followed and the security of the ballots was properly maintained by the judges of election.

3.        All three judges of election were prepared and qualified for their duties in accordance with the Uniform Local Union Constitution.

4.        Local 1101 adhered to proper procedures by appointing the business manager as the sole delegate to the district council by vote of the membership.

5.        Thompson’s employment as a part-time officer at Local 1101 does not constitute “working at the calling.” 

6.        Thompson’s payment of retirement dues, collection of a pension, and full-time work on his cattle ranch is ample proof that Thompson is not working at the calling of Local 1101.

7.        Thompson is retired within the meaning of Article V of the Uniform Local Union Constitution and is not eligible to hold office.

Decision

The protest regarding Thompson’s eligibility to run for office is GRANTED. The election for president/business manager will be rerun, including the nomination process.  All other protests regarding the Election are DENIED.  This Decision shall be read at the next membership meeting and all members may receive, upon request, a copy of this Decision at their own expense.

During the course of the hearings and the investigation, it became apparent that Local 1101 is loosely run, with little adherence to the general procedures of LIUNA.  Although it is a relatively small local union and the officers are well intended, the International, Uniform Local Union, and Uniform District Council Constitutions should all be followed.  It is recommended that the International Union audit the activities of Local 1101.

PETER F. VAIRA

INDEPENDENT HEARING OFFICER