E.I. Du Pont De Nemours

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 29, 1985

274 N.L.R.B. 1451 (N.L.R.B. 1985)

E I DU PONT & CO 1451
E. I. Du Pont de Nemours and Teamsters Local 515,
an affiliate of the International Brotherhood of
Teamsters , Chauffeurs , Warehousemen & Help-
ers of America . Cases 10-CA-14698 and 10-
CA- 14776
29 March 1985
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND
ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN DOTSON AND MEMBERS
HUNTER AND DENNIS
On 6 August 1982 the National Labor Relations
Board, by a three-member panel, issued a Decision
and Order' in this proceeding, adopting, inter alia,
an administrative law judge's decision, relying on
NLRB v. J. Weingarten,2 that the Respondent vio-
lated Section 8(a)(1) of the National Labor Rela-
tions Act by conducting an investigatory interview
of employee James Merriman after having denied
Merriman's request for an employee representative.
The Respondent was ordered to cease and desist
from this unlawful activity.
Thereafter, the Board filed an application for en-
forcement of its Order with the United States
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.3 Subse-
quently, the Board moved the court for an order
severing the investigatory interview issue so that
the Board could reconsider that portion of its De-
cision and Order. The court granted the Board's
motion and remanded' that portion of the case to
the Board for further consideration.
On 30 October 1984 the Board informed the par-
ties that it had decided to reconsider sua sponte its
decision on the investigatory interview issue and
that they were entitled to file statements of posi-
tion. The General Counsel and the Respondent
filed statements of position. The Board has recon-
sidered the record as a whole and the statement of
position filed by each party.
After reconsideration we have decided to re-
verse the Board's earlier finding that the Respond-
ent's refusal to allow Merriman, an unrepresented
employee, the assistance of a coworker during an
investigatory interview violated Section 8(a)(1). In
Sears, Roebuck & Co., 274 NLRB 230 (1985), over-
ruling Materials Research Corp., 262 NLRB 1010
(1982), the Board held that its previous extension
of the Supreme Court's decision in Weingarten to
unrepresented employees was erroneous. We con-
cluded that the right to representation at Weingar-
ten-type interviews applies only to unionized em-
ployees. Here, there was no certified or recognized
bargaining representative. Therefore, the Repson-
dent was under no obligation to agree to Merri-
man's request that a third party attend the investi-
gatory interview. Accordingly, we shall dismiss
that portion of the consolidated complaint pertain-
ing to the Merriman interview.
AMENDED CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The administrative law judge's Conclusions of
Law are amended as follows:
Delete Conclusion of Law 3(1).
' 263 NLRB 159 (1982) Member Hunter did not participate in that de-
cision
2 420 U S 251 (1975)
3 NLRB v E I du Pont de Ne,nours, 750 F 2d 524 (6th Cir 1984)
ORDER
Paragraph 18 of the consolidated complaint is
dismissed.
274 NLRB No 209