Gaylin Buick, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 7, 1972

200 N.L.R.B. 107 (N.L.R.B. 1972)

GAYLIN BUICK 107
Gaylin Buick , Inc. and Local 259, United Automobile
Workers, International Union , United Automobile,
Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of
America, Petitioner . Case 22-RC-5270
November 7, 1972
DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF
REPRESENTATIVE
BY CHAIRMAN MILLER AND MEMBERS
FANNING AND PENELLO
Pursuant to a Stipulation for Certification Upon
Consent Election, dated April 21, 1972, an election
by secret ballot was conducted on May 26, 1972,
under the direction and supervision of the Regional
Director for Region 22 among certain employees at
the Employer's Union, New Jersey, facility. At the
conclusion of the election, the parties were furnished
with a tally of ballots, which showed that of
approximately 41 eligible voters, 38 cast ballots, of
which 22 were for, and 14 against, the Petitioner, and
2 were challenged. The challenged ballots were
insufficient in number to affect the results of the
election. Thereafter, the Employer filed timely
objections to conduct affecting the results of the
election.
In accordance with the National Labor Relations
Board Rules and Regulations, Series 8, as amended,
the Regional Director conducted an investigation,
and, on July 24, 1972, issued his Report on
Objections, in which he recommended that the Board
overrule the objections in their entirety, and certify
the Petitioner as the collective-bargaining representa-
tive of the employees stipulated by the parties to be
in the unit. The Employer filed timely exceptions to
the Regional Director's report, and a brief in support
thereof. Thereafter, the Petitioner filed an answering
brief.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the
National Labor Relations Board has delegated its
authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board
finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within
the meaning of the Act, and it will effectuate the
purposes of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein.
2. The Petitioner is a labor organization claiming
to represent certain employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concern-
ing the representation of employees of the Employer
within the meaning of Section 9(c)(1) and Section
2(6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The following employees, as stipulated by the
parties, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes
of collective bargaining within the meaning of
Section 9(b) of the Act:
All shop employees in the service department,
including service writers, service clericals, parts
employees, porters, lubrication men, car jockeys,
body shop employees, polishers, and mechanics
employed at the Employer's locations at 2140
Morris Avenue and 2265 Morris Avenue, Union,
New Jersey, but excluding all other employees,
office clerical employees, new and used car
salesmen, watchmen, guards, and supervisors as
defined in the Act.
5. The Board has considered the Employer's
objections, the Regional Director's report, the Em-
ployer's exceptions thereto, and the entire record in
the case and hereby adopts the Regional Director's
findings, conclusions, and recommendations.'
Accordingly, as we have overruled the Employer's
objections, and as the Petitioner has secured a
majority of the valid votes cast, we shall certify the
Petitioner as the collective-bargaining representative
of the employees in the appropriate unit.
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVE
It is hereby certified that Local 259, United
Automobile Workers, International Union, United
Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement
Workers of America, has been designated and
selected by a majority of employees in the unit found
appropriate as their representative for the purposes
of collective bargaining, and that, pursuant to
Section 9(a) of the Act, the said labor organization is
the exclusive representative of all such employees for
the purpose of collective bargaining with respect to
rates of pay, wages, hours of employment, and other
conditions of employment.
CHAIRMAN MILLER, dissenting in part:
I find that Employer's Objection 3, alleging threats
to Spanish-speaking employees of immigration inves-
tigation if they did not vote for Petitioner, raises
substantial and material issues of fact and law
warranting a hearing. Accordingly, I would, contrary
to my colleagues, direct a hearing on this issue to
determine whether there was a sufficient effect on the
atmosphere in which the election was conducted as
to require that a second election be run under more
desirable circumstances.
i The exceptions of the Employer, in our opinion, raise no material or Regional Director's findings , conclusions , and recommendations . Accord-
substantial issues of fact or law which would warrant reversal of the ingly, the Employer's request for a hearing in this matter is hereby denied.
200 NLRB No. 21