U.S. Department of Labor
Office of Labor-Management Standards
Division of Enforcement
Washington, DC 20210
(202) 693-0143 Fax: (202) 693-1343

April 15, 2011

Dear :

This Statement of Reasons is in response to your December 20, 2010 complaint filed
with the United States Department of Labor alleging that violations of Title IV of the
Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959, as amended (LMRDA), 29

U.S.C. §§ 481-484, occurred in connection with the election of officers of the Operating
Engineers, Local 520 conducted on August 13, 2010.
The Department conducted an investigation of your allegations. As a result of the
investigation, the Department has concluded, with respect to each of your specific
allegations, that no violation occurred, which may have affected the outcome of the

You allege that incumbent officers of Local 520 used union telephone lists to call
members to encourage them to vote for the incumbent officers’ slate in violation of
section 401(g) of the LMRDA. Section 401(g) prohibits the use of union resources to
promote any candidate for union office. Specifically, you allege that members of Local
520 informed you that they received calls prior to the election asking them to vote for
the incumbents, but that these members had not given their phone numbers to the
incumbents. During the investigation, the Department determined that certain Local
520 officers made campaign calls using the contact lists on their union-issued cellular
phones. The investigation thus supports a finding that union officers used union lists to
promote candidates for office in violation of the Act.

However, section 402(c)(2) of the LMRDA, provides that an election will only be
overturned where a violation may have affected the outcome of the election. The
Department’s investigation determined that Local 520 officers made approximately 66
campaign calls using the contact lists on their union-issued cellular phones. The
smallest margin of victory for an incumbent candidate was 225 votes. Accordingly, any
violation would not have affected the outcome of the election.

You also allege that Local 520 allowed an owner/operator to nominate election
candidates in violation of the International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE)
constitution. Section 401(e) requires that elections be conducted in accordance with a
union’s constitution and bylaws. Article XXIV, subdivision 1, section (b) of the IUOE
constitution provides, “No member owner/operator of an entity that employs
operating engineers shall . . . nominate candidates in any Local Union election.” The
Department’s investigation revealed that , the member in question, is the
co-owner of an excavation and trucking business. However, that business has no
current collective bargaining agreement with Local 520 and has not employed any Local
520 members for at least ten years. The investigation thus supports the conclusion of
Local 520 that is not currently an owner/operator within the meaning of the
IUOE constitution. Accordingly, there is no violation.

For the reasons set forth above, it is concluded that no violation of the LMRDA occurred
that may have affected the outcome of the election. Accordingly, the office has closed
the file on this matter.


Patricia Fox
Chief, Division of Enforcement

Vincent J. Giblin
General President IUOE
1125 17th St., NW
Washington, D.C. 20036
Ron Kaempfe
President, Operating Engineers, Local 520

Beverly Dankowitz
Acting Associate Solicitor
Civil Rights and Labor-Management Division