Americold Logistics, LLC

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 27, 2015

25-RD-102210 (N.L.R.B. Apr. 27, 2015)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
AMERICOLD LOGISTICS, LLC
Employer
and Case 25-RD-102210
KAREN COX
Petitioner
and
RETAIL, WHOLESALE AND DEPARTMENT
STORE UNION, UFCW, LOCAL 578
Intervenor
ORDER
On May 23, 2013, the Regional Director issued a Decision and Order dismissing the
petition because he found that it was filed within 6 months of the parties’ first bargaining
session, and that a reasonable time for bargaining had not elapsed. The Petitioner filed a request
for review. While that request for review was pending, the Petitioner filed another petition in
Case 25-RD-108194 for the same unit, and the Regional Director issued a Decision and
Direction of Election. The Union filed a request for review of the Decision and Direction of
Election, and the Board granted review. In Americold Logistics, LLC, 362 NLRB No. 58 (2015),
the Board issued a Decision on Review and Order reversing the Regional Director, finding that
the petition in Case 25-RD-108194 was barred because a reasonable period of time for
bargaining had not elapsed when the petition was filed.1 Noting the pendency of the instant
earlier petition, the Board found that consistent with its Decision on Review and Order
dismissing the petition in Case 25-RD-108194, it would deny the Petitioner’s request for review
of the dismissal in this case by a separate order. Id., slip op. at 1 fn. 2. Accordingly, the
Petitioner’s request for review of the Regional Director’s Decision and Order is denied as it
raises no substantial issues warranting review.2
MARK GASTON PEARCE, CHAIRMAN
PHILIP A. MISCIMARRA, MEMBER
KENT Y. HIROZAWA, MEMBER
Dated, Washington, D.C., April 27, 2015.

1 Member Miscimarra, dissenting, would have processed the petition.
2 Member Miscimarra would grant review to consider whether, consistent with the views expressed in his dissenting
opinion in Americold Logistics, LLC, 362 NLRB No. 58 (2015), the petition at issue in the instant case should be
processed.