Fulton Bag and Cotton Mills

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 23, 1953

106 N.L.R.B. 370 (N.L.R.B. 1953)

370 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
APPENDIX A
Engineering Assistants
Employees engaged on the following training programs of the
Employer
Test Engineering Program
Manufacturing Training Program
Factory Training Program
Planning Methods and Wage Rate and Time-Study Employees
Tool Planners
Tool Designers No. land No. 2.
Machine Designer
Tool Expediter ( outside and inside)
Tool Engineers
Trial and Test Employees
Packing Methodsmen
Laboratory Technicians
Messengers
Production Schedule Employees
Inventory Control Employees
Routing Clerk
Rail Transportation Dispatcher
Transportation Rate Clerk
Freight Tracer
Reservations Clerk
Traffic Coordinator
Safety Coordinator
General Clerks to the Production, Maintenance, Inspection, and
Shipping and Receiving Room Foremen
FULTON BAG AND COTTON MILLS and PRINTING SPE-
CIALTY AND PAPER PRODUCTS UNION NO. 388, INTER-
NATIONAL PRINTING PRESSMEN AND ASSISTANTS'
UNION OF NORTH AMERICA, AFL, Petitioner. Case No.
21-RC-2898. July 23, 1953
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF
RESULTS OF ELECTION
On March 6, 1953, pursuant to a Decision and Direction of
Election' issued by the Board, an election by secret ballot was
conducted in the above-entitled matter under the direction and
supervision of the Regional Director for the Twenty-first
Region in the unit found to be appropriate. Upon the completion
of the election, a tally of ballots was issued and duly served
upon the parties. The tally shows that of approximately 87
eligible voters, 72 cast valid ballots, of which 23 were for the
Petitioner and 49 were against the Petitioner.
1 Not reported in printed volumes of Board decisions.
106 NLRB No. 59.
FULTON BAG AND COTTON MILLS 371
On March 13, 1953, the Petitioner filed timely objections to
the election, alleging, inter alia, that the Employer made a
speech to the employees in the plant after working hours the
day before the election which contained threats of reprisal if
the Petitioner won the election, and that the Employer, on
March 3, ordered Petitioner' s representatives who were dis-
tributing handbills, from the Company's parking lot, making
certain statements that were heard by employees who were
working nearby, which conduct was calculated to prevent a
free choice by the employees as to whether they desired the
Petitioner as their bargaining representative.
Thereupon, in accordance with the Rules and Regulations of
the Board, the Regional Director conducted an investigation and
issued and duly served upon the parties a report on objections.
In his report, the Regional Director found that 3 of the 5
objections made by the Petitioner were without merit; he made
no finding or recommendation on the objection relative to the
exclusion of union representatives from the parking lot and he
recommended that the election be set aside on the basis of the
Employer's speech the day before the election. The Petitioner
filed no exceptions to the Regional Director's report; the
Employer excepted to his recommendation that the election be
set aside.
The Board has considered the Petitioner's objections, the
Regional Director's report, and the Employer's exceptions to
the Regional Director's report, and finds merit in the Em-
ployer's exceptions.
The Regional Director's report shows that the speech which
he concludes warrants setting aside the election, occurred in
the following circumstances. On the afternoon of March 5,
1953, the day before the election, during working hours
supervisors notified all employees that the plant manager
wanted to meet with them in the front end of the plant at 4:30
p. m. closing time. When all the employees were assembled
they were told that their attendance at the meeting was voluntary
and they were addressed by the plant manager. Two or three of
the employees left during the meeting. The working hours of
the employees ended at 4:30 and no one received pay for the
time spent in attendance at the meeting. The election was
held the following day from 3:30 to 4:30 p. m. The Petitioner
made no request before or after the speech to address the
employees.
The speech of March 5 contained no threats or promises of
benefit and was privileged under Section 8 (c),but the Regional
Director concluded that because of its timing it interfered with
the election. We do not agree. The Board has held that where
an employer times a speech on company time and property so
as to preclude the possibility of a union's requesting and
receiving a similar opportunity to speak to employees, this
conduct is tantamount to a refusal to consider a request to reply
and interferes with employees' freedom of choice of bargaining
representative by preventing them from hearing both sides of
322615 0 - 54 - 25
372 DECISIONS OF, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
the question under comparable circumstances .. ' The facts of
this case , however, do not warrant a finding that the Employer
preempted the last opportunity for discussion and made im-
possible the presentation of the Petitioner ' s views under
circumstances approximating equality . We think that here
there was sufficient time between the speech and the election
for the Petitioner to request a similar opportunity to present its
views to the employees . As no request was made by the
Petitioner , we find that the Employer has not interfered with
the election of March 6, 1953.
Having sustained the Employer ' s exceptions to the finding of
the Regional Director upon which he based his recommendation
that the election be set aside , we find that the Petitioner's
objections do not raise substantial and material issues with
respect to the, conduct of the election . Accordingly , the objec-
tions are hereby overruled , and we shall issue a certification of
results of election based on the tally of ballots.
[The Board certified that a majority of the valid ballots was
not cast for Printing Specialty and Paper Products Union No.
388, International Printing Pressmen and Assistants ' Union of
North America, AFL, and that the said labor organization is
not the exclusive representative of the employees in the unit
heretofore found appropriate.]
Chairman Farmer and Member Peterson took no part in the
consideration of the above Supplemental Decision and Certifi-
cation of Results of Election.
2 Hill Brothers Company, 100 NLRB 964; Foreman & Clark, Inc., 101 NLRB 40.
ROBERTS BROTHERS and RETAIL CLERKS INTERNATIONAL
ASSOCIATION, AFL, LOCAL 201. Case No . 36-CA-347.
July 24, 1953
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon the charge duly filed on December 8, 1952 , by Retail
Clerks International Association , AFL, Local 201, herein called
the Union, the General Counsel of the National Labor
Relations Board, herein called the General Counsel, by the
Regional Director for the Nineteenth Region issueda complaint
dated February 26, 1953, against Roberts Brothers , herein
called the Respondent , alleging that the Respondent interfered
with, restrained , and coerced and is interfering with, restrain-
ing, and coercing its employees in the exercise of their rights
guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act, and thereby engaged in and
is engaging in an unfair labor practice within the meaning of
106 NLRB No. 74.