Alladin Plastics, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 21, 1970

182 N.L.R.B. 64 (N.L.R.B. 1970)

64 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Alladin Plastics , Inc , Employer and Chauffeurs, Sales
drivers & Helpers Local 572, International Brotherhood
of Teamsters , Chauffeurs , Warehousemen & Helpers
of America , Petitioner Case 31-RC-1 179
April 21 1970
DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF
REPRESENTATIVE
By CHAIRMAN MCCULLOCH AND MEMBERS FANNING
AND JENKINS
Pursuant to a Stipulation for Certification Upon Con-
sent Election executed on September 9, 1969, an election
by secret ballot was conducted on October 28 and 29,
1969 under the direction and supervision of the Regional
Director for Region 31 among the employees in the
stipulated unit At the conclusion of the election, the
parties were furnished with a tally of ballots which
showed that of approximately 120 eligible voters, 111
cast ballots, of which 62 were for, and 47 against,
the Petitioner, I was challenged, and I was void The
challenged ballot was not sufficient in number to affect
the results of the election Thereafter, the Employer
filed timely objections to the conduct of the election
and to conduct affecting the results of the election
In accordance with the National Labor Relations
Board Rules and Regulations, the Regional Director
conducted an investigation and, on December 10, 1969,
issued and duly served upon the parties his Report
on Objections, in which he recommended that the objec
tions be overruled in their entirety and that the Petitioner
be certified as the collective-bargaining representative
in the appropriate unit Thereafter, the Employer filed
timely exceptions to the Regional Director's Report and
a brief, and the Petitioner filed a brief
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National
Labor Relations Board has delegated its powers in con
nection with this case to a three-member panel
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds
I The Employer is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the Act and it will effectuate the purposes
of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein
2 The Petitioner is a labor organization claiming to
represent certain employees of the Employer
3 A question affecting commerce exists concerning
the representation of employees of the Employer within
the meaning of Sections 9(c)(1) and 2(6) and (7) of
the Act
4 The parties stipulated, and we find, that the follow-
ing employees constitute a unit appropriate for the pur-
pose of collective bargaining within the meaning of
Section 9(b) of the Act
All production and maintenance employees, includ-
ing plant clerical employees, machine shop employ-
ees, working foremen and leadmen, shipping,
receiving and warehouse employees, and truckdri
vers employed by the Employer at the plant located
at 1415 West 178th Street, Gardena, California,
excluding office clerical employees, outside sales-
men, guards, supervisors and professionals as
defined in the Act
5 The Board has considered the Regional Director's
Report, the Employer's exceptions thereto, and the
briefs and hereby adopts the Regional Director's findings
and recommendations t
As more fully detailed in the Regional Director's
Report the election in this case was initially set for
October 23 and 24 1969 As a result of an error by
the Board agent assigned to conduct the election, it
was not held on the specified date, but rather was
rescheduled for, and held on, October 28 and 29, 1969
In its exceptions the Employer contends, inter aha,
that the election should be set aside because there
was insufficient time in which to overcome a plant
rumor to the effect that the Employer had "bought
off" the National Labor Relations Board to delay the
election
We agree with the Regional Director that, under the
circumstances herein, the existence of such a rumor
does not afford an adequate ground for setting aside
the election The Employer had ample opportunity to
reply to the rumor and, in fact, did so repeatedly
There was no claim that the Petitioner originated, author
ized, or approved the circulation of the rumor On
the contrary, the Petitioner gave prompt and wide disse-
mination of a bulletin to all employees wherein it was
prominently stated that the Employer, as well as the
Petitioner was not responsible for the election's delay
The Employer recognizing the effectiveness of the Peti
tioner's statement as to the causes of the delay, made
copies thereof and posted them on bulletin boards
throughout the plant Therefore as both parties took
vigorous and forthright measures to inform employees
as to the true reason for the election's postponement,
we cannot find the existence of the rumor sufficiently
prejudicial to justify sustaining the objection
It is further asserted, in the Employer's exceptions,
that before rescheduling the election, the Regional
Director should have afforded it the right to a hearing
and direction of election, as its prior waiver of such
rights was conditioned on the election being held on
the date originally specified This contention was not
made in the Employer's objections to the conduct of
the election, and the initial assertion thereof in its excep
tions is not timely Furthermore, even if timely, such
position has no merit See Southern Bleachery & Print
Works, Inc 79 NLRB 624
The Employer also alleges that the election should
be set aside because the Regional Director, in connection
with the rescheduling of the election, erred in failing
to prepare and supply copies of a new Notice of Election
We do not agree The time and place of the rescheduled
election was thoroughly brought to the attention of
the employees through leaflet distributions employee
' The Employers exceptions in our opinion raise no material or
substantial issues of fact or law which would warrant reversal of
the Regional Director s findings and recommendations The Employer s
request for a hearing is therefore denied
182 NLRB No 13
ALLADIN PLASTICS, INC
meetings , and bulletin board postings , including an
amended copy of the original Notice of Election In
addition , the Employer has presented no specific allega-
tion that any employee was unaware of the rescheduled
time and place of the election or that the election was
rescheduled at such a time as to render it difficult
or impossible for anyone to vote See N L R B v
Conlon Bros Mfg Co , 187 F 2d 329 (C A 7) Finally,
we note that had all nine of the nonvoting eligible
employees in the unit voted and had they all cast ballots
against the Petitioner , the Petitioner ' s majority would
not have been affected thereby
Accordingly , as the tally shows that the Petitioner
has obtained a majority of the valid ballots cast, we
shall certify it as the exclusive bargaining representative
of the employees in the appropriate unit
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVE
65
It is hereby certified that Chauffeurs, Salesdrivers
& Helpers Local 572, International Brotherhood of
Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of
America has been designated and selected by a majority
of the employees of the Employer in the unit found
appropriate herein as their representative for the purpos-
es of collective bargaining and that, pursuant to Section
9(a) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended
the said labor organization is the exclusive representative
of all the employees in such unit for the purposes
of collective bargaining with respect to rates of pay,
wages, hours of employment, and other terms and condi-
tions of employment