Reich

This appeal arises out of a Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA) 1 Title IV suit brought by the Secretary of Labor against Teamsters’ Local 396. The Secretary asserts that Local 396 violated LMRDA § 401(e) anti-discrimination and adequate safeguards provisions by refusing to make available to candidates for union office a list of Local members’ job sites. The district court granted the Secretary’s motion for summary judgment, and Local 396 appealed. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

The Election

This dispute had its genesis in a November 1992 election of union officers conducted by Teamsters Local 396. Two slates of candidates vied for office: the “Lopez slate,” comprised entirely of incumbents, and the “Huff slate,” comprised entirely of candidates who had never held union office. This was the first contested election in Local 396’s history.

At the time of the campaign, Local 396 had 8,000 members spread among approximately 100 different employers. All of the candidates on the challenging Huff slate worked for the United Parcel Service, which employs about two-thirds of the Local’s members.…