1743 Slimp v. Local Union 3520

Case No: 1743


Slimp alleged that his opponents were permitted to campaign in the cafeteria while they were being paid by the company. He provided their time sheets to support this argument. The time sheets show the hours for which these employees received compensation, but Slimp has not demonstrated that the compensated time was used for campaigning. The Election Committee Chairperson stated that she did not observe the alleged campaign activity in the cafeteria. We agree generally with the IEB’s conclusion that this is the sort of violation a candidate should bring to the attention of the election committee immediately, although such conduct could be grounds for overturning an election if the violations were so widespread that the election committee could not credibly claim ignorance of them. There is no persuasive evidence of the kind of open and obvious violations of the rule that should have been addressed by the election committee.

Issues addressed in this decision