Bullard Industries, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 13, 1958

119 N.L.R.B. 1290 (N.L.R.B. 1958)

1290 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ganda it would obtain for the employees. The Intervenor contends
that the Employer's remaining silent in the face of these claims was,
in effect a concession on its part that it would grant them. We cannot
agree The fact that the Employer reported to the employees the
position it had taken at the bargaining table with respect to the Inter-
venor's actual contract demands imposed no obligation to answer the
general campaign propaganda of the-Petitioner. As the Intervenor
has failed to show that the Employer made,threats or promises of
benefit in its campaign material, we find no merit in the Intervenor's
third objection.
We have, in agreement with the Regional Director, found all of the
,Employer's objections to be without merit and they are hereby over-
ruled. As the Petitioner received a majority of the votes cast in the
election we shall certify the Petitioner as representative of the
,employees in the appropriate unit.
[The Board certified Independent Union of Paper Workers as the
'designated collective-bargaining representative of the employees' in
-the appropriate unit of all production and maintenance employees
employed at the Employer's`St. Louis, Missouri, plant, excluding-office
-clerical employees, truckdrivers, professional employees, guards, and
-supervisors as defined in the Act.]
Bullard Industries, Inc. and Helical Tube Corporation and Sheet
Metal Workers International ,Association, AFL-CIO. ^ Cases
Nos. 10-CA -837 and 10-CA-2871. January 13, 1958
DECISION AND ORDER
On August 16, 1957, Trial Examiner Max M. Goldman issued his
Intermediate Report in the tbove-entitled, proceeding, finding, that
Respondents had engaged in and were engaging .in certain unfair
.laborpractices and recommending that they cease and desist therefrom
.and take certain affirmative ,action, as, set forth n the copy of the
Intermediate Report attached hereto. Thereafter,, Respondents filed
exceptions to the Intermediate Report and a supporting brief.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the, Act, the Board
has delegated its powers in connection with this, case to a three-member
panel [Chairman Leedom and Members Rodgers and Bean].
The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner made
-at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed.
The rulings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the
Intermediate Report, the exceptions and brief, and the entire record,
119 NLRB No 153.
BULLARD INDUSTRIES, INC. 1291
.and hereby adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of
the Trial Examiner.'
ORDER
Upon the entire record and pursuant to Section 10 (c) of the
.National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Rela-
tions Board hereby orders that Bullard Industries, Inc. and Helical
Tube Corporation, Newport, Tennessee, their officers,, agents, succes-
sors, and assigns, shall :
1. Cease and desist from :
'(a) Discouraging membership in Sheet Metal Workers Interna-
tional Association AFL-CIO, or any other labor organization of their
employees by discriminatorily. discharging employees or by in' any
'other manner discriminating against them in regard to the hire and
tenure of employment or any term or condition of employment.
.(b) Interfering with, restraining, or coercing their employees in
the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act, by the
conduct enumerated in the section of the Intermediate Report
.entitled, "Conclusions of Law."
(c) In any other manner' interfering with, restraining, or coercing
their employees in the exercise of their rights to self-organization, to
form, to join, to assist labor organizations, including the above-named
labor organization, to bargain collectively through representatives of
their own choosing, to engage in concerted activities for the purposes
of collective bargaining or mutual aid or protection, or to refrain
• from any and all such activities, except to the extent that such right
may be affected by. an agreement requiring membership in a labor
.'organization as a condition of employment, as authorized in Section
:8 (a) (3) of the Act.
2.. Take the following affirmative action which the Board finds will
.!effectuate the policies of the Act:
(a) Offer Billy Greene, Ruble Ball, Dallas Shults, Leonard
Clevenger, and Mermel J. Valentine immediate and full reinstate-
ment to their former or substantially equivalent positions without
prejudice to their seniority or other rights and privileges and make
them whole in the manner set forth in the section of the Intermediate
Report entitled "The Remedy."
i The Trial Examiner found that Bullard Industries , Inc. and Helical Tube Corporation
constitute a single employer . We agree. In addition to the reasons for such finding
stated by the Trial Examiner, we also note that both companies have a substantial mimber
of common employees , common factory and personnel managers , and a common Under-
standing Committee.
Contrary to the Respondents , we do not find that the Trial Examiner's resolutions of
credibility reflect prejudice. In our view, the testimony of Assistant Chief of Police Webb,
and employee Easterly , both disinterested witnesses , fully support the credibility findings
of the Trial Examiner.
1292 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
(b) Preserve and make available to the Board or its agents, upon
request, for examination and copying, all payroll records, social-
security payment records, timecards, personnel records and reports,
and all other records necessary to analyze the amounts due under the
terms of this Order.
(c) Post at their plants at Newport, Tennessee, copies of the notice
attached to the Intermediate Report marked "Appendix A." 2 Copies
of such notices to be furnished by the Regional Director for the Tenth
Region, shall, after being duly signed by the Respondents' authorized
representatives, be posted by the Respondents immediately upon
receipt thereof, and be maintained by them for a period of at least
sixty (60) consecutive days thereafter, in conspicuous places, including
all places where notices to employees are customarily posted.
Reasonable steps shall be taken by the Respondents to insure that said
notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.
(d) Notify the Regional Director for the Tenth Region in writing,
within ten (10) days from the date of this Order, what steps the
Respondents have taken to comply herewith.
2 This notice . Is amended by substituting for the words "The Recommendations, of a
Trial Examiner" the words "A Decision and Order ." In the event that this Order is
enforced by decree of a United States Court of Appeals , there shall be substituted for the
words "Pursuant to a Decision and Order " the words "Pursuant to a Decree of the United
States Court of Appeals , Enforcing an Order."
INTERMEDIATE REPORT AND RECOMMENDED ORDER
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon charges filed by Sheet Metal Workers International Association , AFL-CIO,
herein called the Union , the General Counsel by the Regional Director for the
Tenth Region (Atlanta, Georgia ) of the National Labor Relations Board issued
complaints dated March 18 and April 12, 1957, against Bullard Industries, Inc.
and Helical Tube Corporation, herein called the Respondents , alleging that the
Respondents had engaged in and were engaging in unfair labor practices affecting
commerce within the meaning of Section 8 (a) (1) and ( 3) and Section 2 (6) and
(7) of the. Labor Management Relations Act, 1947, 61 Stat . 136, herein called
the Act. Copies of the complaints and the charges , together with an order
consolidating the cases and notice of hearing. . were served upon the Respondents
and the Union.
With respect to unfair labor practices , the complaints allege that by engaging
in certain acts and conduct , the Respondents in January 1957, interfered with,
restrained , and coerced their employees , and that on January 26 and 31, 1957,
the Respondents engaged in discrimination by discharging five named employees
'because they engaged in concerted activities . The Respondents in their answers
denied that they have engaged in any unfair labor practices.
Pursuant to notice , a hearing was held on May 21 and 22, 1957, at Newport,
Tennessee , before the duly designated Trial Examiner. Full opportunity to be
heard , to examine and to cross-examine ' witnesses , and to introduce evidence
bearing on the issues was afforded the parties . The parties did not present oral
argument or file briefs.
Upon the entire record in the case, and from his observation of the witnesses,
the Trial Examiner makes the following:.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE RESPONDENTS
Bullard Industries , Inc. and Helical Tube Corporation , Tennessee corporations,
are engaged in the manufacture of condensers and automotive parts, and, of
BULLARD INDUSTRIES, INC . 1293
stainless steel tubing, respectively, at Newport, Tennessee. Each sells and ships
finished products to points outside the State of Tennessee at an annual rate in
excess of $50,000. The controlling interests of both corporations are vested
in the same individuals, and the employees of both corporations are subject to
a common labor relations policy. It is found that the Respondents constitute
a single employer and that they are engaged in commerce within the meaning
of the Act.
II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Sheet Metal Workers International Association, AFL-CIO, is a labor organization
within the meaning of the Act.
III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
A. The events
In December 1956 Dallas Shults and Ruble Ball, alleged discriminatees, solicited
their fellow employees to sign cards for the International Association of Machinists.
Early in January 1957, Milford N. Bullard, president of Bullard Industries, called
Ball into his office and told Ball that he had been getting union cards signed,
that the employees had informed their wives and that the merchants in town had
called Bullard about it. Bullard further told Ball that he then had a pocket full
of cards with him. Ball stated that he did not know anything about it. Bullard
declared that he would have to let Ball go and further that he liked Ball and
suggested that he quit or accept employment in another of Bullard 's business
interests. Ball declined the other employment and suggested that he be given his
check and a release and that he would be on his way. At the close of the
.conversation Bullard told Ball to return to his job , quit engaging in union activities,
and that he, Bullard, would have the papers prepared the following day. When
Ball reported at the plant the following day, Joseph R. Neal, factory manager,
informed Ball that he and Bullard had discussed the matter, and for Ball to
forget it and return to work as if nothing had happened.'
In about the middle of January after Shults and Ball had obtained a number
of International Association of Machinists' cards signed by employees, they con-
cluded that they had been working to obtain representation in the wrong labor
organization and they then set out to obtain membership among the employees in
the Union. Word was passed around on the second shift, on which Shults and
Ball worked, of a union meeting to be held after work about 1 a. in. January 24,
on a supermarket parking lot in town. About 20 employees attended the meeting,
including alleged discriminatees Ball, Shults, Billy Greene, Leonard Clevenger,
and Mermel J. Valentine. Some signed cards for the Union in Shults' and Ball's
cars and they kept the cards. The parking lot was lighted not only by street lights
but also by the lights on the parking lot itself. The next afternoon, at the close of
the first shift, Friday, January 25, Fred Easterly, who is not alleged as a discriminatee,
was discharged. On Saturday morning, January 26, Shults, Ball, Greene, and
Clevenger were discharged. The Respondents had then intended to discharge
Valentine with the others, but due to an error involving Valentine's timecard he
was not discharged until January 31. The reason appearing on the termination
notice of all these men, including Easterly, was "Not suitable for this type of work."
Another person, Charles Spurgen, who was not alleged as a discriminatee and not
called as a witness was terminated along with the others on January 26. In his
testimony Neal took the position that he was responsible for the wording appearing
on the discharge notices.
i These findings are based upon Ball 's credible testimony . Bullard testified that he did
not know anything about the International Association of Machinists, that he had never
heard tell about the Union until after the discharges involved. Bullard did, however,
testify that he had heard rumors that cards were being signed at the plant prior to the
discharges, but that he did not investigate to find out which labor organization it was,
and that although all subjects are discussed with supervisors, the organizational drive was
not discussed with them. Neal, after testifying that he was unaware that an organiza-
tional drive among the employees was taking place in December and January, testified
that he had heard rumors to that effect and that he had seen a piece of literature taped
to the water heater which he tore off and threw away. Neal also testified that there was
a piece of literature posted on the bulletin board a little while back and so far as he
knew it was still there at the time of the hearing. Neal denied discussing this literature
with anyone.
1294 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
After Easterly was discharged at the close of his shift on the afternoon of Friday,
January 25, he went to see Bullard at his home that night at about 7 p. m. Easterly
inquired of Bullard as to the reason for his discharge and Bullard stated that they
had too many men and that they had to get rid of some. Easterly pointed out that
they were hiring all along and Bullard explained that he saw Easterly's car parked.
at the union meeting the other morning. Easterly denied having been present.
Bullard asked Easterly whether his car license plate was 46-522, and Easterly replied
in the affirmative. Bullard stated that the car was at the meeting and that he had
checked it. Easterly insisted that there was a mistake and assured Bullard that he was.
home and that his car was in the garage. Bullard, agreed that there could have been an
error in license plate numbers as the license plate could have had a little mud on it,..
and told Easterly to report for work Monday morning. When Easterly reported'
for work that morning, he got his timecard from Jed Hartzell, personnel manager,.
after explaining to him that he, Easterly, was to return to work. Hartzell then stated
to Easterly that he had told some of them on Friday that Easterly had not been,
mixed up in it. Easterly returned to work and later that day Bullard told Easterly
that he had seen the car on the lot there Friday night and that its license tag prefix
was 44 instead of 46. Easterly, who is not a union member, continued in the-
Respondent's employ and was an employee during the time of the hearing.2
According to Bullard, several days before the discharges, someone drove off'
in a hurry from an unfenced parking area near the plant where materials and tools,.
some of which had been missing, had been stored, and he noted that the license plate
on the car was 46-522. Further, he determined from the town officials that that
was Easterly's number and that he thereupon ordered his discharge. Bullard con-
tinued, that Easterly thereafter came out to the house and he asked Easterly not.
about the union meeting parking lot, explaining in his testimony that he did not
know of the meeting, but about the plant parking lot, and that Easterly explained.
that he had been at home, that thereafter they checked with others and found that
Easterly.had been at home, and he was returned to work. Further, according to
Bullard, after the conversation with Easterly, Bullard called Alvin Webb, assistant
police chief, and determined that license plate 44-522 was registered in Shults'
name and he then found a car with that license number on the Respondents' parking
lot that night. Bullard also testified that after finding out it was Shults' car he did
not discharge Shults as Shults had already been terminated with the other men..
According to Webb's testimony, upon' Bullard's license plate identification inquiry,
Webb provided Bullard with Shults' name and that this occurred a few days before
Shults was discharged. Bullard's testimony is not credited, and Webb's testimony
is credited.
When Greene, Ball, Shults, and Clevenger were discharged at the close of their
shift on the morning of January 26, they and Spurgen appeared at the office, saw
Neal and Thomas E. Cramb, production superintendent, and asked about the
discharges. Neal declared that it was Bullard's decision to let them go and Bullard
was called from his home to the plant. When Bullard arrived at the plant, they
asked him why they were discharged and he replied that they were no fools, they
knew why they were discharged. Bullard also told them that they did not like their
jobs, that they had been fighting him behind his back, that before he would let them
come to work or have a union in his plant he would close the doors. Bullard also
stated that he had been a short distance from the group at the supermarket parking
lot meeting. Addressing Greene, whom Bullard had told to keep his nose clean
and stay out of the Union on a prior occasion, Bullard stated that Greene had not
kept his nose clean.3
B. Conclusions
Bullard testified that 'he took no part in the decision to discharge the men involved.
Neal testified that regardless of the reason given on the discharge slips. which was
"Not suitable for this type of work," Ball,'Greehe, Shults, Clevenger, and Valentine
were discharged for not doing their work, that is, not staying at their machines and
2 These findings are based upon Easterly's credible testimony. Hartzell was not called
as it witness.
3 These findings are based upon the credible testimony of Ball, Greene, Clevenger, and
Shults. Spurgen, as already noted, (lid not appear as a witness. Cramb testified that he
was in and out of the office several times that morning and could not testify as to the
Incident. Neal testified that the events described above occurred in an argumentative
atmosphere. that people spoke'in loud tones, and that he could not because of these circum-
stances testify as to what occurred and he could not see how anyone else could testify as
to what occurred. Bullard's denials and his version of the events are not credited.
BULLARD INDUSTRIES, INC. . 1295
getting out a fair day's work. Neal explained that the reason that explanation was
given on the discharge slips was so that the men ,could draw unemployment com-
pensation without a waiting period penalty and so that that explanation would be
given to a prospective employer when the Respondents were asked for a reference.
He explained further, however, that if a man had done something deliberately
wrong such as breaking a machine or engaging in stealing, that that would be put
on his discharge slip. It is noted that the same wording appeared on Easterly's
discharge slip which, according to Neal, made Easterly eligible for unemployment
compensation without a waiting period although, further according to Neal, Bullard
had told Neal that the reason for discharging Easterly was, in effect, suspicion
of stealing. Neal also testified that the plant was relatively new in the area, having
started in the summer and fall of 1956, and that with minor exceptions they had
employed local men with no prior industrial employment experience. Further,
that periodically they weeded out men for such reasons as doing sloppy work,
leaving their machines excessively, and loitering in the restroom. According to
Neal, this periodic weeding out process began around October or November 1956,
and that on the morning of January 26, when the alleged discriminatees were dis-
charged, about 8 employees on the night shift and I or 2 employees on the day
shift were terminated. It was thereafter developed from a preheating document
listing from the Respondents' records all employees terminated prior to January 25,
that only 3 persons had been terminated as not qualified; that on January 25, only
6 employees were terminated as being unsuitable for the work and that these were
Shults, Greene, Ball, Spurgen, Clevenger, and Valentine; 4 and that the remaining
employees were laid off for lack of work. In support of its contention that the men
involved were not doing their work, the Respondents adduced testimony by Bullard,
Neal, Cramb, and the plant's industrial engineer, that the men engaged in such
conduct as not being at their work stations, visiting with others, voluntarily limiting
production, and spending too much time at the water fountain and washroom.
The men involved, on the other hand, denied or explained this testimony. In view
of the findings made above reflecting upon the validity of Neal's. explanations and
reflecting upon the credibility of the respective witnesses. and also upon the basis
of the impression the witnesses made at the hearing, it is found that the record does
not establish the Respondents' contention that the men were not doing their work.
It is found that in effectuation of their policy of opposition to the self-organization
of -their -emnloyees, the Respondents discharged the employees involved to prevent
the unionization of the plant.
It is found that the Respondents interfered with, restrained, and coerced their
employees in the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act, and thereby engaged
in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 (a) (1) of the Act, by
Bullard's conduct in the following respects: (1) threatening to discharge Ball for
engaging in union activities; (2) engaging in surveillance of the Union's meeting;
(3) informing employees that he engaged in surveillance of their union meeting;
and (4) threatening to close the plant if the Union came in.
It is further found that in violation of Section 8 (a) (3) and (1) of the Act,
the Respondents discriminatorily discharged Billy Greene,. Ruble Ball, Dallas Shults,
and Leonard Clevenger on January 26, and Mermel J. Valentine on January 31, 1957.
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE
The activities of the Respondents set forth in section III, above, occurring in con-
nection with the operations of the Respondents described in section I above, have
a close, intimate, and substantial relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among the
several States and tend to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing com-
merce and the free flow of commerce.
V. THE REMEDY
Having, found that the Respondents have engaged in unfair labor practices in
violation of Section 8 (a) (1) and (3) of the Act, it will be recommended that
4 Valentine was not in -fast discharged, as already noted, until January 31.. Neal ex-
plained that he had intended to discharge Valentine with the others and that was the
reason Valentine's name appeared on the list. Neal explained further that Valentine had
not punched his timecard in on January 25, and it was assumed he was not at work at
that time. Although the date January 25 is given, in the text, the discharges occurred
about 1 a, m. at the close of the second or night shift on January 20. Spurgen, as already
noted, is not involved in this proceeding.
1296 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Respondents cease and desist therefrom and take affirmative action designed to
effectuate the'policies of the Act.
Thus, having found that the Respondents interfered with , restrained , and coerced
their employees by the conduct enumerated in the section herein entitled, "Con-
clusions," the Trial Examiner will recommend that the Respondents be ordered to
cease and desist from this conduct . Having found that the Respondents on January
26, 1957, discriminated against Billy Greene, Ruble Ball, Dallas Shults , and Leonard
Clevenger; and on January 31, 1957, discriminated against Mermel J. Valentine, it
will be recommended that the Respondents be ordered to offer each of them im-
mediate and full reinstatement to his former or substantially equivalent position
without prejudice to his seniority or other rights and privileges, and make each
whole for any loss of pay suffered by him as a result of the discrimination , by pay-
ment to each of a sum of money equal to the amount he would have earned from
his respective date of discrimination to the date of the offer of reinstatement less
his net earnings to be computed on a quarterly basis in the manner established by
the Board in F. W. Woolworth Company, 90 NLRB 289. Earnings in one par-
ticular quarter shall have no effect upon the back-pay liability for any other such
period.
The Respondents ' infractions of Section 8 (a) (1) and ( 3) of the Act, herein
found, disclose a fixed purpose to defeat self-organization and its objectives . Because
of the Respondents ' unlawful conduct and their underlying purposes , the Trial
Examiner is persuaded that the unfair labor practices found are related to other
unfair labor practices proscribed by the Act, and that the danger of their commis-
sion in the future is to be anticipated from the course of the Respondents ' conduct
in the past. The preventive purpose of the Act would be thwarted, unless the
remedial order is coextensive with the threat. In order , therefore , to make effective
the interdependent guarantees of Section 7, to prevent a recurrence of unfair labor
practices , and thus to effectuate the policies of the Act, it will be recommended that
the Respondents be ordered to cease and desist from infringing in any manner upon
the rights guaranteed by Section 7 of the Act.
On the basis of the foregoing findings of fact , and upon the entire record in the
case, the Trial Examiner makes the following:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Sheet Metal Workers International Association , AFL-CIO , is a labor organi-
zation within the meaning of Section 2 (5) of the Act.
2. By discriminating with regard to the hire and tenure of employment of Billy
Greene, Ruble Ball , Dallas Shults , Leonard Clevenger, and Mermel J. Valentine,
thereby discouraging membership in the above -named labor organization, the
Respondents have engaged in and are engaging in unfair labor practices within the
meaning of Section 8 (a) (3) of the Act.
3. By (a) threatening the discharge of an employee for engaging in union activities;
(b) engaging in surveillance of the Union's meeting ; (c) informing employees that
their union meeting was under surveillance ; ( d) threatening to close the plant if
the Union came in; and ( e) engaging in discrimination , the Respondents have engaged
in and are engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 (a) (1)
of the Act.
4. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices affecting com-
merce within the meaning of Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
[Recommendations omitted from publication.]
APPENDIX A
NOTICE TO ALL EMLOYEES
Pursuant to the recommendations of a Trial Examiner of the National Labor
Relations Board , and in order to effectuate the policies of the Labor Management
Relations Act, we hereby notify our employees that:
WE WILL NOT discourage membership in Sheet Metal Workers International
Association , AFL-CIO , or any other labor organization by discharging our
employees or in any other manner discriminating in regard to their hire or tenure
of employment or any term or condition of employment.
WE WILL NOT threaten to discharge employees for engaging in union activities,
engage in surveillance of union meetings , or threaten to close the plant in the
event a union is successful in organizing our employees.
OAKTRON INDUSTRIES, INC. 1297
WE WILL NOT in any other manner interfere with, restrain , or coerce our
employees in the exercise of their rights to self-organization , to form, join, or
assist any labor organization , to bargain collectively through representatives of
their own choosing , and to engage in concerted activities for the purposes of
collective bargaining or other mutual aid , or to refrain from any or all such
activities.
WE WILL offer the following employees immediate and full reinstatement
to their former or similar positions without prejudice to their seniority or other
rights and privileges and make each of them whole for any loss of pay suffered
as a result of discrimination against him:
Billy Greene Leonard Clevenger
Ruble Ball Mermel J. Valentine
Dallas Shults
All our employees are free to join, form, or assist any labor organization, and to
engage in any self-organization or any other concerted activities for the purpose of
collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection, or to refrain from any or
all such activities, except to the extent that such rights are affected by an agreement
made in conformity with Section 8 (a) (3) of the Act.
BULLARD INDUSTRIES, INC. and HELICAL
TUBE CORPORATION,
Employers.
Dated------------------- By-------------------------------------------
(Representative) (Title)
This notice must remain posted for 60 days from the date hereof, and must not be
altered , defaced, or covered by any other material.
Oaktron Industries , Inc. and International Association of Ma-
chinists , AFL-CIO , Petitioner. Case No. 13-RC-5638. Janu-
ary 13,1958.
DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF RESULTS
OF ELECTION
Pursuant to a stipulation for certification upon consent election,
dated August 2, 1957, and approved August 12, 1957, an election was
conducted on September 17, 1957, under the direction and supervision
of the Regional Director for the Thirteenth Region, among the
employees at the Employer's Monroe, Wisconsin, plant. At the con-
clusion of the election, the parties were furnished a tally of ballots
which showed that of approximately 114 eligible voters, 112 cast
ballots, of which 48 were for Petitioner and 57 against. There were
7 challenged ballots, a number insufficient to affect the results of the
election.. Two ballots were void.
On September 18, 1957, the Petitioner filed timely objections to
conduct affecting the results of the election. On November 8, fol-
lowing an investigation, the Regional Director issued and duly served
upon the parties his report on objections, a copy of which is attached
119 NLRB No. 157.
476321-5 8-vol . 119-83