Teamsters lawyer cites grounds for union vote

Thursday, Sept. 22, 2005 | 9:02 a.m.

CARSON CITY -- A lawyer for the Teamsters Union told the Nevada Supreme Court on Wednesday that there are ample legal grounds to schedule a standard election for the estimated 10,000 classified support staff employees of the Clark County School District to choose which union will represent the employees in contract negotiations.

But a lawyer for the Education Support Employees Association that currently represents the workers argued that Teamsters Local 14's election petition should be disqualified. The two sides have been fighting since 2001 over the Teamsters Union's effort to supplant the employees association at the bargaining table.

The three-judge panel of the court listened to the arguments and will render a decision later.

Justice William Maupin, who presided at the hearing, commended both sides' efforts.

The state's Employee-Management Relations Board initially ruled there was "good faith doubt" about the employees association's claimed right to continue representing the school workers. It ordered an election. But it also said that in order to win, the Teamsters needed to get the votes of a majority of those signed up in the current union and not just a majority of those who went to the polls.

Kristin L. Martin, the lawyer for the Teamsters Union, told the court that an election was the best way to determine what the employees want. She said the union presented 4,200 to 4,500 signature cards of those who supported the Teamsters. The management relations board did not count the signatures but ruled there should be an election. An appeal was made to the district court. The Teamsters Union liked the board's decision that an election was warranted but went to court over the additional condition regarding the majority vote.

Michael Dyer, attorney for the employees association, said there must be verification of the list of election petitioners submitted to the state board. Dyer said there was no proof that 50 percent of the current union members wanted to have an election or switch to the Teamsters Union. Senior Deputy Attorney General Dianna Hegeduis, in representing the state relations board, urged the court to uphold the board's decision regarding an election and the majority requirement. She said there was substantial evidence to support that ruling

She said there was a $6 million shortfall in health care insurance by the Education Support Employees Association. That resulted in complaints from employees as well as from doctors who were unhappy that they were not getting paid. The state board received testimony about that issue and it received two boxes of signed cards backing an election.

Hegeduis also argued that the board was right to require that the Teamsters get more than 50 percent of the current union's members to vote for the change.

Justice Mark Gibbons told Hegeduis that if the rule required a majority of those signed up, rather than those who vote, it would result in nobody winning the election. He suggested it would create anarchy. For instance, he said those who run for U.S. Senator or governor would never been elected if they had to get 50 percent plus one vote of the total number of those registered.

Martin argued it would be an insurmountable hurdle if the Teamsters had to get 50 percent plus one vote of the full membership of those employees now enrolled in the support employees association.

But Justice James Hardesty said the law requires a majority of those enrolled in the local government employees unit to reach a decision. The law does not talk about a majority of only those who voted, he said.

Dyer said he believed the present employees association would win in an election.

Dyer said there would be chaos in the future if an election was scheduled on a challenge by a rival union in which there was no verification of the signatures needed to call an election. He argued any group could come in and ask for an election without showing any verified record of employees supporting an election.

Martin said the Teamsters presented the cards of more than 4,000 employees that backed the organization. And the state's Employee Management Relations Board didn't have the resources to verify each card.