Blommer Chocolate Company of California, LLC

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 31, 2016

32-RC-131048 (N.L.R.B. May. 31, 2016)

1
PMMc
Union City, CA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
BLOMMER CHOCOLATE COMPANY OF
CALIFORNIA, LLC
Employer
and Case 32-RC-131048
BAKERS UNION LOCAL 125, BAKERY,
CONFECTIONERY, TOBACCO WORKERS
AND GRAIN MILLERS INTERNATIONAL
UNION
Petitioner
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND ORDER
On February 17, 2016, a three-member panel of the National Labor Relations Board
(Member Miscimirra dissenting) issued an unpublished decision directing a second election in
the above-titled proceeding. On February 25, the Petitioner filed a motion requesting that the
Board reconsider its decision and direct the Employer to post a notice of second election that
includes language informing employees that the first election was set aside because the
Employer engaged in certain conduct interfering with employee free choice. The Employer filed
a response stating that it does not oppose the motion and would post the requested modified
notice. We shall grant the Petitioner's motion for the reasons given below.1
In its exceptions to the hearing officer’s report, the Petitioner did not request the notice
language it now seeks. Although formally styled as a "Motion for Reconsideration," the

1 The National Labor Relations Board has delegated its authority in this proceeding to a three-
member panel.
2
Petitioner's motion actually requests only that the Board supplement, rather than reconsider, its
previous decision. As such, and given that the motion is unopposed, we shall treat the motion as
requesting amendment of a Board decision rather than a motion for reconsideration under
Section 102.65(e), and grant the request. See Lufkin Rule Co., 147 NLRB 341 (1964).2
ORDER
The Petitioner's motion is granted. Accordingly, the Board’s underlying decision is
hereby amended to require that the Notice of Second Election include language informing
employees that the first election was set aside because the Board found that certain conduct by
the Employer interfered with employees’ free choice.
Dated, Washington, D.C., May 31, 2016.
__________________________________
Mark Gaston Pearce, Chairman
___________________________________
Philip A. Miscimarra, Member
___________________________________
Lauren McFerran, Member
(SEAL) NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

2 Member Miscimarra dissented in part from his colleagues’ underlying decision, and he would
have upheld the results of the first election. For the reasons stated above, however, he joins in
granting the Petitioner’s request for modification of the decision.