Hoffman Hardware Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 31, 1955

112 N.L.R.B. 982 (N.L.R.B. 1955)

982 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Hoffman Hardware Co. and Retail, Wholesale & Department
Store Union , CIO, Petitioner. Case No. 21-RC-3790. May 31,
1955
DECISION, ORDER, AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
On December 8, 1954, pursuant to a stipulation for certification upon
consent election, an election by secret ballot was conducted, under the
direction of the Acting Regional Director for the Twenty-first Region.
Upon conclusion of the election, a tally of ballots was furnished the
parties in accordance with the Rules and Regulations of the Board.
The corrected tally shows that, of about 64 eligible voters, 62 cast
ballots, of which 31 were for, and 26 were against the Petitioner, and
5 voted challenged ballots.' The challenged ballots were sufficient in
number to affect the results of the election.
On December 15, 1954, the Employer filed timely objections to con-
duct affecting the election. The Acting Regional Director investi-
gated the objections and on January 10, 1955, issued his report on ob-
jections and challenges. In his original report, the Acting Regional
Director recommended that the Employer's objection concerning the
Petitioner's distribution of leaflets containing altered reproductions
of the Board's official secret ballot before the election be sustained and
that the election be set aside. Although the Employer agreed with
the Acting Regional Director's recommendation that the Petitioner's
conduct is sufficient to warrant the setting aside of the election, in its
exceptions it contended that the Acting Regional Director erred in
not making an investigation and report on the challenged ballots be-
fore he proceeded with the report on the Petitioner's objectionable
conduct. The Employer also excepted to the Acting Regional Direc-
tor's recommendation that the unit previously agreed upon by the
parties is the appropriate unit. The Petitioner filed no exceptions.
The Board, after having considered the Acting Regional Director's
original report and the Petitioner's exceptions thereto, found merit
in the Employer's exceptions concerning the challenged ballots and
on March 15, 1955, isued an order directing the Acting Regional Di-
rector to issue a supplemental report on the challenged ballots.
Thereafter, pursuant to the Board's order and in accordance with the
Board's Rules and Regulations, on April 15, 1955, the Acting Re-
gional Director issued a supplemental report on the challenged bal-
lots. The Employer timely filed exceptions to the supplemental report
on challenged ballots. The Petitioner filed no exceptions.
1 The tally originally showed that 63 eligible voters cast ballots of which 6 voted chal-
lenged ballots . With agreement of the parties , the tally was corrected by the Acting
Regional Director after he had filed his original report.
112 NLRB No. 125.
HOFFMAN HARDWARE CO. 983
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board makes the following
findings :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the National Labor Relations Act.
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent employees
of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of certain 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 of the Employer constitute a unit ap-
propriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the mean-
ing of Section 9 (b) of the Act.2
All employees of the Employer employed at Los Angeles, Califor-
nia, excluding office clerical employees, salesmen, price clerks, and all
supervisors as defined in the Act.
5. In the supplemental report on challenged ballots, the Acting
Regional Director recommends that the challenges to the 2 ballots,
those of Milton Bell and Bob Morrell, be sustained and that the chal-
lenges to the remaining 3 ballots be overruled. The Employer con-
tends in its only exception to the supplemental report on challenged
ballots that the Acting Regional Director erred in recommending
that the challenge to Bob Morrell's ballot be sustained upon the
ground that Morrell is a supervisor. However, the Employer ad-
mits that the exception is now immaterial because, in view of the
Acting Regional Director's unopposed recommendations concerning
the other 4 challenged ballots, Morrell's challenged ballot is insuffi-
cient to affect the results of the election. For reasons hereinafter
stated, we agree with the Employer that Morrell's ballot can have
no effect upon the results of the election.
As there are no exceptions to the Acting Regional Director's rec-
ommendations that the challenge to Milton Bell's ballot be sustained
and that the challenges to 3 ballots be overruled, we shall, accord-
ingly, adopt the Acting Regional Director's recommendation with
respect to these 4 ballots. Therefore, it is arithmetically clear that
Morrell's challenged ballot becomes insufficient to affect the results of
the election. Accordingly, we find it unnecessary to make a determi-
nation with respect to the issue raised by the Employer's exception to
2 The unit herein found appropriate is substantially identical with that stipulated by
the parties and used as basis for the election previously conducted. Although the Em-
ployer contended in its objections and in its exceptions to the Acting Regional Director's
original report that the stipulated unit is inappropriate, it now requests to withdraw,
without prejudice, its objection to the appropriateness of the unit. Because we perceive
no cogent reason to permit such a conditional withdrawal, the request is denied. We find
no meiit in the Employer's original contention that the unit is inappropriate. Although
the language of the stipulation may not, in all respects, be that usually employed by the
Board in its unit determination, it appears that the stipulated unit violates no Board
policy. Accordingly, we find no reason for disturbing the unit as agreed upon by the
parties See The Murray Coinpany of Texas, Inc., 107 NLRB 1571.
984 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
the Acting Regional Director's recommendation that the challenge to
Morrell's ballot be sustained. Because it still appears that the Peti-
tioner has won the election, we must now dispose of the question as to
the alleged misconduct of the Petitioner.
As noted above, the Acting Regional Director recommended that
the Employer's objection concerning the Petitioner's distribution of
leaflets containing altered reproductions of the Board's official ballot
before the election be sustained and that the election be set aside.
Because the Petitioner filed no exception to the foregoing recom-
mendation, we shall set aside the election and direct that a new election
be conducted.
[The Board set aside the Election.]
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
Superior Knitting Corporation and Alto Manufacturing Cor-
poration and Sinndncal Obrera Insular , Inc., Petitioner. Case
No. 24-RC-789. May 31,1955
DECISION, ORDER, AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
On March 25, 1955, pursuant to a stipulation for certification upon
consent election, an election by secret ballot was conducted under the
direction of the Regional Director for the Twenty-fourth Region.
Upon conclusion of the election, a tally of ballots was furnished the
parties in accordance with the Rules and Regulations of the Board.
The tally shows that, of approximately 184 eligible voters, 166 cast
ballots, of which 56 were for, and 108 were against the Petitioner,
and 2 voted challenged ballots. The challenged ballots are not suffi-
cient in number to affect the results of the election.
On March 30, 1955, the Petitioner filed timely objections to conduct
affecting the results of the election. The Regional Director investi-
gated the objections and on April 20, 1955, issued his report and
recommendation on objections to election. In his report, the Regional
Director recommended that the Petitioner's objection concerning the
Employers' distribution of leaflets containing altered reproductions
of the Board's official secret ballot before the election be sustained
and that the election be set aside. Thereafter, the Employers filed
timely exceptions to the Regional Director's report.
The Board, having considered the Regional Director's report, the
Employers' exceptions, and the entire record in the case finds as
follows :
1. The Employers are engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the National Labor Relations Act.
112 NLRB No. 127.