G4S Government Solutions, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 13, 2015

05-RC-126522 (N.L.R.B. Feb. 13, 2015)

1
Washington, D.C.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
G4S GOVERNMENT SOLUTIONS, INC.
Employer
and Case 05-RC-126522
S.D.M. OF AMERICA, INC.
Petitioner
and
FEDERAL CONTRACT GUARDS OF AMERICA,
INTERNATIONAL UNION (FCGOA)
Intervenor
DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVE
The National Labor Relations Board, by a three-member panel, has considered
objections to a mail ballot election held between July 22, 2014, and August 12, 2014,
and the hearing officer’s report recommending disposition of them. The election was
conducted pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election. The tally of ballots shows
99 for the Petitioner, 20 for the Intervenor, and 3 against the participating labor
organizations, with no challenged ballots.
The Board has reviewed the record in light of the exceptions1 and supporting
argument, has adopted the hearing officer’s findings and recommendations,2 and finds
that a certification of representative should be issued.

1 The hearing officer divided the Intervenor’s Objection 2 into three issues and
separately analyzed each issue. Although the Intervenor excepted to the hearing
officer’s recommendation to overrule Objection 2, the Intervenor provided supporting
2
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVE
IT IS CERTIFIED that a majority of the valid ballots have been cast for S.D.M. of
America, Inc., and that it is the exclusive collective-bargaining representative of the
employees in the following appropriate unit:
All full-time and regular part-time Justice Protective Service Officers (JPSOs)
assigned to the Department of Justice’s contract in the North Capitol Area; but
excluding all office and/or clerical employees, professional employees,
temporarily assigned employees, substitute employees, managerial employees,
and supervisors as defined by the Act.
Dated, Washington, D.C., February 12, 2015
_______________________________
Mark Gaston Pearce, Chairman
_______________________________
Philip A. Miscimarra, Member
_______________________________
Lauren McFerran, Member
(SEAL) NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

argument only with respect to that part of Objection 2 concerning Brent Willis’s allegedly
objectionable pro-Petitioner supervisory conduct. The Intervenor did not address other
aspects of Objection 2 in its supporting argument, and we therefore disregard those
matters. See 2 Sisters Food Group, 357 NLRB No. 168, slip op. at 3 fn. 11 (2011).
2 In adopting the hearing officer’s recommendation to overrule the Intervenor’s
Objection 2, we assume without deciding that Brent Willis was a Sec. 2(11) supervisor
during the critical period. Even on that assumption, we affirm the hearing officer’s
finding that the Intervenor failed to produce any evidence that Willis engaged in
objectionable pro-Petitioner supervisory conduct. In adopting the hearing officer’s
recommendation to overrule the Intervenor’s Objection 3, we rely on his finding that only
approximately 10 percent of the addresses on the eligibility list were inaccurate, and do
not rely on his finding that the Intervenor had additional employee contact information
apart from the eligibility list.