C.F.R. » Title 29 » CHAPTER IV—OFFICE OF LABOR-MANAGEMENT STANDARDS, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR › SUBCHAPTER A—LABOR-MANAGEMENT STANDARDS › PART 452—GENERAL STATEMENT CONCERNING THE ELECTION PROVISIONS OF THE LABOR-MANAGEMENT REPORTING AND DISCLOSURE ACT OF 1959 › Subpart H—Right To Vote

29 C.F.R. § 452.94

Reasonable opportunity to vote

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

The statutory protection of the right to vote implies that there must be a reasonable opportunity to vote. Thus, there is an obligation on the labor organization to conduct its periodic election of officers in such a way as to afford all its members a reasonable opportunity to cast ballots. A union may meet this obligation in a variety of ways, depending on factors such as the distance between the members' work site or homes and the polling place, the means of transportation available, the nature of the members' occupations, and their hours of work. A reasonable opportunity to vote may require establishing multiple polling places or the use of a mail ballot referendum when the members are widely dispersed. It would also be reasonable for the time period for voting to be extended to accommodate members who might otherwise be prevented from voting due to conflicting work schedules. Shortening the voting period by a late opening of the polls would not, in itself, be improper unless the intent or practical effect of such action is to deprive members of their right to vote.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1984–1985 · leading case: Robert J. McGinnis v. Local Union 710, Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters, a Labor Org., 774 F.2d 196 (7th Cir. 1985).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Robert J. McGinnis v. Local Union 710, Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters, a Labor Org., 774 F.2d 196 (7th Cir. 1985). “Members living outside the Local’s jurisdiction are not at issue in this case, and Local 710 itself has used mail balloting for officer elections as recently as 1982 (Def.”
Donovan v. Local 41, Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters, 598 F. Supp. 710 (W.D. Mo. 1984). “The use of multiple polling places is also referred to in 29 C.F.R. § 452.94 . In any event, the evidence showed that while mailed balloting requires arrangements different from manual balloting, the procedure does not cause administrative problems particularly greater than a…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.