business agents from three to two, you would have been elected. As noted above, section 401(e) of the LMRDA requires a union to conduct its election of officers in accordance with the constitution and bylaws of the organization insofar as they are not inconsistent with the provisions of Title IV of the LMRDA. So long as the union followed its constitution to amend its bylaws to reduce the number of business agents, there was no violation of the LMRDA. In October 2013, the local notified membership of a special meeting to amend the bylaws. The special meeting was held on November 21, 2013. Members at the meeting were given copies of the proposed amendment to reduce the number of business agents. The amendment passed by a vote of 61 to 17. The local approved the change in September 2014. The process to amend the bylaws was properly followed. Accordingly, there was no violation of the LMRDA when the union changed its bylaws to reduce the number of elected business agents.

Third, you alleged that the local failed to maintain a sign-in sheet on the day of the election and that the local cannot verify who voted in the election or whether a person voted more than once. Section 401(e) of the LMRDA provides that in any secret election, "[e]ach member in good standing shall be entitled to one vote." During its investigation, the Department determined that the local placed a stamp next to the name of each member who checked in to vote in the election. This system had been used by the local in previous elections. The Department's investigation revealed 255 total voter names with stamps next to them, but the voting machines listed only 253 total voters. The Department was not able to review the voting cartridges because the cartridges were replaced by the City of Philadelphia, which operated the voting machines. ILA election committee member explained that it is possible one or two members checked in to vote in the election and had their name stamped, but did not actually vote. There was no evidence to suggest that the two vote discrepancy resulted from failure to properly safeguard the integrity of the polling place or election documents. Therefore, with respect to this allegation, there was no violation of the LMRDA.

Fourth, you alleged that ineligible retired members were permitted to vote. The local's bylaws do not permit retired members to vote in officer elections. The union conceded that it did erroneously permit one retired member to vote in the December 2013 election. The Department compared the local's list of retired members with the voter eligibility list for the years 2011, 2012, and 2013, and determined that no other retired members voted in the challenged election. Section 402(c) of the LMRDA provides that an election will only be rerun where a violation may have affected the outcome of the election. In this election, the successful candidate won by four votes. Therefore with respect to this allegation, the violation of section 401(e) did not affect the outcome of the race.

For the reasons set forth above, the Department concludes that there was no violation of the LMRDA that may have affected the outcome of the election. Accordingly, the office has closed the file on this matter.


Stephen J. Willertz
Acting Chief, Division of Enforcement

cc: Harold J. Daggett, International President
International Longshoremen’s Association
5000 West Side Avenue
North Bergen, NJ 07047

Boise Butler, President
ILA Local 1291
3460 North Delaware Avenue
Port Administration Building Suite 101
Philadelphia, PA 19134

Christopher B. Wilkinson, Associate Solicitor
Civil Rights and Labor-Management Division