Canton Sterilized Wiping Cloth Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 10, 1960

127 N.L.R.B. 1083 (N.L.R.B. 1960)

CANTON STERILIZED WIPING CLOTH COMPANY 1083
which was set aside, should have been used for the new election. This
contention is without merit. Absent unusual circumstances, not pres-
ent herein, the Board uses a new eligibility period for a second
election.
As it appears from the foregoing facts that the strike came to an
end prior to the holding of the election, and that the strikers who
cast challenged ballots had been replaced during the strike, we find
that such strikers were ineligible to Vote .3 Therefore, the challenges
to their ballots are hereby sustained. As the challenged replacements
were employees on the eligibility and election dates, they were eligible
voters. The challenges to their ballots are hereby overruled.
Accordingly, as we have overruled the challenges to six ballots, as
identified below, we shall direct that such ballots be opened and
counted.
[The Board directed that the Regional Director for the Sixth
Region shall, within 10 days from the date of this Direction, open and
count the ballots of Richard Armstrong, Harold Fisher, Darryl Gra-
ham, George Petrisko, Richard Solman, and Eugene Wolny and serve
upon the parties a revised tally of ballots.]
CHAIRMAN LEEDOM took no part in the consideration of the above
Supplemental Decision and Direction.
3 See The Martin Bros. Container & Timber Products Corp ., 127 NLRB 1086. In
view of our disposition of these challenges, we need not reach the contentions made by
the Employer with respect thereto in its exceptions.
Canton Sterilized Wiping Cloth Company and Laundry and
Dry Cleaning International Union, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case
No. 8-RC-3404. June 10, 1960
DECISION AND DIRECTION
Pursuant to a stipulation for certification upon a consent election,
an election was conducted on May 20, 1959, under the direction and
supervision of the Regional Director for the Eighth Region, among
the employees in the stipulated unit. Upon the conclusion of the bal-
loting, the parties were furnished a tally of ballots, which showed
that of approximately 28 eligible voters, 10 cast valid ballots for, and
9 against, the Petitioner; and 9 cast challenged ballots. The Peti-
tioner filed timely objections to the conduct of the election.
Thereafter, the Regional Director conducted an investigation and
on July 10, 1959, issued his report on objections and challenges, in
which he recommended that the challenges to four ballots be over-
ruled and the ballots opened and counted; and that if, upon the count-
127 NLRB No. 422.
1084 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ing of such four ballots, the unresolved challenges remained sufficient
in number to affect the results, the disposition of the remaining chal-
lenges be delayed until the status of such voters be finally determined
in unfair labor practice proceedings then pending in Case No.
8-CA-1867.1 He further recommended that objections 2 and 5 and
portions of 1 and 11 be overruled, and that, if necessary, a hearing be
held on the remaining objections, and that such hearing be consoli-
dated with the hearing in Case No. 8-CA-1867. No timely exceptions
were filed to the Regional Director's report, and the General Counsel
denied the appeal from the Regional Director's dismissal of certain of
the charges above-referred-to in Case No. 8-CA-1867. The Board on
August 21, 1959, issued an order directing Regional Director to open
and count challenged ballots, in which it sustained the challenges to
the ballots of the four voters to which the charges had been dismissed,
and adopted the Regional Director's recommendations pro forma in
all other respects.
- On August 31, 1959, pursuant to the Board's order, the four afore-
said challenged ballots were opened and counted and a revised tally
of ballots was issued, showing 10 votes cast for, and 13 against the
Petitioner, with 1 challenge remaining unresolved. Thereafter, on
September 10, 19591 the Employer executed a stipulation in the instant
case , as well as a settlement agreement in Case No. 8-CA-1867. In
the stipulation, the Employer waived its right to a hearing and agreed
that in the event the Petitioner refused to execute the stipulation, the
Board could nevertheless set aside the election and order a new one.
On September 29, 1959, the Board issued an Order and Direction of
Second Election, in which it approved the above-mentioned stipula-
tion, ordered that the election held on May 20, 1959, be set aside, and
directed that a second election be conducted after the expiration of the
posting period in Case No. 8-CA-1867. Pursuant thereto, a second
election was conducted on January 15, 1960. After the balloting, the
parties were furnished a tally of ballots, which showed that, of ap-
proximately 35 eligible voters, 12 cast valid ballots against the Peti-
tioner, and 1 for. There were 23 challenged ballots. No objections to
the election were filed.
The Regional Director investigated the challenges and on February
16, 1960, issued his report on challenged ballots, in which he recom-
mended that one of the challenges be overruled. He also made find-
ings with respect to the remaining 22 challenges involving alleged
strikers and replacements, but made no recommendations as to their
disposition. No exceptions were filed to the report.
1 The Regional Director thereafter issued a complaint against the Employer in that
proceeding , alleging, inter alte, a violation of Section 8(a) (3) only with respect to one of
such five challenged voters. He dismissed the charges relating to discharges of the other
four challenged voters The dismissal was appealed to the General Counsel.
CANTON STERILIZED WIPING CLOTH COMPANY 1085
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the Act.
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain
employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section
9(c)(1) andSection2(6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The following employees, as stipulated by the parties, constitute
a unit appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act :
All production and maintenance employees of the Employer at its
Canton, Ohio, plant, including the truckdriver, but excluding all
office clerical employees, professional employees, guards, and super-
visors as defined in the Act.
5. The Board agent challenged ballots of 10 individuals who claimed
to be strikers. He also challenged the ballots of 12 production and
maintenance employees hired by the Employer as replacements. The
Regional Director found that the strike began on June 15, 1959, and
that picketing at the Employer's plant was discontinued by the Pe-
titioner sometime in October 1959. There is no indication that the
Petitioner engaged in any other activities in furtherance of the strike.
The Regional Director also found that the Employer hired replace-
ments for the strikers and that, after picketing was discontinued, none
of the strikers requested reinstatement to his prestrike job except
one who did so in December 1959, and whose request the Employer
denied because it then had a full complement of employees. The
eligibility date for the election was January 7,1960. %
No exceptions having been filed to the report,2 we find, upon the
foregoing, that the strike at the Employer's plant was terminated or
abandoned in October 1959. In the circumstances, as the strike had
ended and all strikers had been replaced prior to the eligibility date
for the election, we find that the 10 individuals who had participated
in the strike and whose ballots were challenged were not eligible to
vote under the provisions of Section 9(c) (3) of the Act, as amended,'
and that the 12 whose ballots were challenged by the Petitioner were
eligible as permanent employees employed on the eligibility and elec-
tion dates. Therefore, the challenges to the ballots of the former
group are hereby sustained, and the challenges to the ballots of the
latter group are overruled'
2 On May 6, 1960, the Board issued and served upon the parties a notice to show cause
why the Board should not conclude from the discontinuance of the picketing in October
1959, that the strike terminated at such time and was not in progress on January 13,
1960, when the instant election was held None of the parties responded to this rotice,
8 See The Martin Bros Container & Timber Products Corp „ 127 NLRB 1086
4 As no exceptions were filed to the Regional Director's recommendation that the
challenge to the ballot of Floorlady Dessie Bushong be overruled, it is adopted pro toi pia
1086 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Accordingly, as we have overruled the challenges to 13 ballots, as
identified below, we shall direct that they be opened and counted.
[The Board directed that the Regional Director for the Eighth
Region shall, within 10 days from the date of this Direction, open
and count the ballots of Dessie Bushong, Theresa Buck, Donna Jean
Myers, Mary Myers, Muriel J. Davidson, Bettie J. Boone, Zella
McClung, Virginia Fornash, Willie Sayer, Edwin Becker, Ray Snow,
Leroy Snor, and Robert Webester, and serve upon the parties a
revised tally of ballots.]
CHAIRMAN LEEDOM took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction.
The Martin Bros. Container & Timber Products Corp., Peti-
tioner and Industrial Carpenters, Local 530, United Brother-
hood of Carpenters & Joiners of America, AFL-CIO. Case
No. 21-RM-591. June 10, 1960
DECISION AND DIRECTION
Pursuant to a stipulation for certification upon consent: election in
the above-entitled matter, an election by secret ballot was conducted
on December 11, 1959, under the direction and supervision of the
Regional Director for the Twenty-first Region, among the employees
in the agreed unit. Upon the conclusion of the balloting, the parties
were furnished with a tally of ballots, which showed that, of approxi-
mately 88 eligible voters, 8 cast valid ballots against the Union, and
none for. There were 46 challenged ballots and 1 ballot was void.
Thereafter, the Union filed timely objections to the conduct of the
election.
After an investigation conducted pursuant to the Board's Rules and
Regulations, the Regional Director on February 17, 1960, issued his
report on objections and challenged ballots, in which he found that
the objections raised no material and substantial issues affecting the
election and recommended that they be overruled. He also made
factual findings with respect to the challenges but made no recommen-
dations with respect to their disposition. Thereafter, the Petitioner-
Employer filed timely exceptions to the report. No exceptions were
filed by the Union.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the
Act.
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employer.
127 NLRB No. 121.