Union Election Vendor Handoff: Records and Retention

Before you sign an electronic union election contract, ask what your committee will receive when the voting window closes—and how it will retrieve those records after the vendor’s service ends. A results PDF is not the complete election archive. The buyer’s goal should be a protected, documented handoff that leaves the union able to preserve and use the underlying records.

This checklist is for union officer elections covered by LMRDA Title IV. The contract and retrieval steps below are practical procurement recommendations, not additional statutory requirements or a guarantee against an election challenge.

Start with the union’s record-preservation responsibility

Under Section 401(e) of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act, the election officials designated in the constitution and bylaws—or the secretary if no other official is designated—must preserve the ballots and all other election records for one year. Hiring a vendor does not change who the statute names as responsible for preservation.

Identify that official before procurement. Then name an operational archive custodian and a backup contact in the committee’s handoff plan. If the vendor will retain some records, document which records, how the responsible union official can obtain them, and what happens when the contract or administrator account ends.

For committees evaluating election services for labor unions, this is a useful contract question: “What access and assistance will remain available throughout our required retention period?” Ask for a written answer rather than relying on a demonstration of the live dashboard.

Specify the complete electronic archive, not just the tally

The records section of the OLMS compliance tip, Electing Union Officers Using Remote Electronic Voting Systems, addresses electronic votes, any paper versions, and other paper and electronic election records. Its list includes eligibility lists, voting credentials, log files, time-stamped software code used to run the system, encrypted ballot files, and tally results.

Turn that source-based list into a deliverables schedule. Ask the bidder to identify each record, its format, its custodian, its transfer method, and the tools or assistance needed to use it. Include relevant nomination materials and notices in the union’s inventory; they should not disappear merely because a different person managed that stage.

Resolve any gap before signing. For example, if software code or protected ballot files will remain with the provider, ask how they will be preserved and made available for an authorized review. Do not silently substitute a summary report for underlying records that the guidance says must be preserved.

Keep ballot protection intact during the handoff

OLMS says encrypted ballot files must remain protected in the same manner as during the election. Its guidance also explains that procedures protecting members’ voting selections apply both while ballots are being cast and afterward. Preservation therefore should not mean exporting every record into a shared folder that everyone can open.

Ask the vendor to explain the protection of each deliverable. Separate ordinary committee documents from restricted credentials and encrypted ballot material. Document who may access each group, how access is authorized, and how required decryption protections continue after the service ends. Do not ask for a spreadsheet linking identifiable voters to their choices.

Keep observer documentation in the handoff, but distinguish observing the process from receiving sensitive files. The OLMS guidance says observers must be allowed to view credential preparation and distribution without seeing the specific credentials sent to individual members. A handoff checklist should preserve the relevant procedural record without creating a new disclosure of secret credentials.

Test retrieval before accepting the final handoff

As a procurement safeguard, agree on a retrieval test before the election. This is a recommended acceptance step, not a separate LMRDA rule. A useful test asks the custodian to locate a non-sensitive record, open it with the agreed tools, and explain what election stage it documents.

Use a file inventory as the acceptance checklist

At closeout, reconcile the promised deliverables against the files received. Record missing items and assign a person and deadline for resolving them. Ask for enough documentation to interpret log fields, timestamps, file versions, and result labels without depending on one vendor employee’s memory.

Test access after the live service ends

Confirm whether archived records remain accessible after the dashboard is disabled. Identify any software licenses, support arrangements, or additional charges needed for later retrieval. If the union keeps its own protected copy, test that authorized staff can retrieve it without weakening the agreed ballot protections.

Use non-sensitive sample records for demonstrations where possible. Do not decrypt protected ballots simply to prove that an archive exists. Ask the provider to demonstrate preservation and authorized retrieval within the safeguards applicable to the election.

Make deletion a separate, documented decision

The one-year preservation requirement is not an instruction to delete everything automatically on the anniversary. For systems with a persistent electronic link between voter and vote, OLMS says destroying encrypted ballot files may be desirable after the later of one year or the conclusion of any post-election Title IV investigation or litigation, with other retention laws also relevant.

Before authorizing deletion, have the responsible officials confirm whether an investigation, litigation, or another retention obligation affects the records. Ask the vendor how a preservation instruction stops scheduled deletion and how it covers records retained in its systems. Record the decision, the materials covered, and the person authorizing it. Obtain legal advice where the retention obligation is unclear.

Put the handoff questions into the RFP

Request a file inventory, a protection plan, a retrieval demonstration, and written terms for access after service termination. Clarify support responsibilities and costs. These answers help the committee assess whether its archive will remain usable—not merely whether the election platform produces an attractive results screen.

OLMS evaluates electronic-voting complaints case by case; its compliance tip does not provide a safe harbor. A careful handoff supports the union’s preservation responsibilities, but it does not establish that every part of an election complied with Title IV.

If your committee is preparing an RFP, ask Votem to discuss your election-records handoff requirements. Bring the deliverables list and retention questions so the conversation stays focused on what your union needs.