1728 Hutchinson v. IEB
Case No: 1728
When insufficient care is taken in the conduct of an election, it may not be possible to say that any of the contests were unaffected by the improprieties. Where the membership rejects the results of an election, the International Union should evaluate the entire electoral process that produced those results. No candidate has a vested right in tainted election results, even if that candidate was innocent of any impropriety. In light of International Representative Helms’s description of the election committee’s incompetence and the election committee chairperson’s acknowledgment of those deficiencies, we do not believe an order to rerun the entire election would have been an excessive remedy under Article 38 and our standards of review applicable to election appeals. Nevertheless, despite all of the problems, there does not seem to be any question that the winners of the presidential and vice presidential contests at Local Union 952 were the membership’s choice to fill these offices. Running a new election for president now would be a costly effort of no practical value. The problems identified by Hutchinson would not be addressed by an order directing the local to rerun the executive races in the 2014 election. As preparations are commenced for this local union’s next triennial elections, we urge the International Union to take a proactive approach toward bringing this local union up to the standards generally observed in UAW local union elections.
Issues addressed in this decisionDemocratic practices
Powers of International officers
Powers of membership
Processing of appeals