General Electric Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 28, 1966

161 N.L.R.B. 618 (N.L.R.B. 1966)

618 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
the election and for issuance of a supplemental report thereon. The
parties to this proceeding may file exceptions to the Regional Direc-
tor's supplemental report, pursuant to Section 102.69 of the Board's
Rules and Regulations, as amended.]
MEMBER JENKINS took no part in the above Decision and Remand
to Regional Director.
General Electric Company, Wiring Device Department and Inter-
national Union of Electrical , Radio and Machine Workers, IUE,
AFL-CIO, Petitioner . Case 1-RC-8749. October ^8, 1966
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF SECOND ELECTION
Pursuant to a stipulation for certification upon consent election
executed on January 11, 1966, an election by secret ballot was con-
ducted on January 26, 1966, under the direction and supervision of
the Regional Director for Region 1 among the employees in the appro-
priate unit. At the conclusion of the election, the parties were fur-
nished with a tally of ballots which showed that of approximately
235 eligible voters, 225 cast ballots, of which 29 were for, and 189
against, the Petitioner, and 7 ballots were challenged. Thereafter, the
Petitioner 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 March 10, 1966, issued and duly served upon
the parties his report and objections in which he recommended that
objection numbered 7 be sustained, and that the election be set aside
and a new election be held. He recommended that all other objections
be overruled. Thereafter, the Employer and the Petitioner filed
timely exceptions to the Regional Director's report.
Upon the entire record in this case, the National Labor Relations
Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, and it will effectuate
the purpose of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein.
2. The Petitioner is a labor organization claiming to represent cer-
tain employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of the employees of the Employer within the meaning of Sec-
tions 9(c) (1) and 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
161 NLRB No. 55.
GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY 619
4. The parties stipulated , and we find , that the following employees
constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargain-
ing within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act.
All production and maintenance employees at the Employer's
plants at 337 Thames Street and at Commercial Wharf, Newport,
Rhode Island , excluding office clerical employees , professional
employees , guards , and supervisors as defined in the Act, and
excluding all other employees.
5. The Board has considered the Petitioner 's objections , the Re-
,ional Director 's report, and the exceptions of the Employer and
the Petitioner thereto, and , for the reasons set out below , adopts the
Regional Director 's recommendation that the election be set aside
and a second election be directed.
The record shows that Plant Manager A. J. Gizzi told the employ-
ees 2 days before the election that there could be no campaigning
within 24 hours before the election . The statement was to the effect
that "By law , neither the company nor the union is allowed to hold
meetings, distribute campaign material , or contact employees 24
hours before the election. In others words tomorrow is a silent day."
The Board 's Peerless Plywood rule of course does not impose any
restrictions on the distribution of literature within 24 hours of an
election, and the plant manager's statement , an obvious reference to
that rule , was therefore an erroneous interpretation of Board law.
However, its mischief lies not so much in being a misrepresentation
of some material fact having relevant bearing on terms and condi-
tions of employment , as found by the Regional Director , but in being
an unwarranted interference with an employee 's right to receive all
lawful communications reasonably concerned with the election. The
statement, coming as it did from one of management 's higher offi-
cials, could reasonably have been taken at face value by the employ-
ees and led to their rejection of literature attempted to be distributed
by Petitioner or other employees during the important hours imme-
diately preceding the election . The statement , in our opinion , there-
fore constituted an improper interference in the election and justifies
our setting the election aside. Cf., N .L.R.B. v. Babcock cC Wilcox
Company, 351 U.S. 105.
[The Board set aside the election conducted herein on January 26,
1966.]
[Text of Direction of Second Election omitted from publication.]
MEMBER JENKINS took no part in the above Decision and Direction
of Second Election.