Kaiser Services

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 22, 1955

111 N.L.R.B. 1093 (N.L.R.B. 1955)

KAISER SERVICES 1093
KAISER SERVICES and LOCAL No. 17, AMALGAMATED LITHOGRAPHERS OF
AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER . Case No. 92O-RC-12652. March 2,1955
Supplemental Decision and Certification of Representatives
Pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election issued herein on
January 11, 1955,1 an election by secret ballot was conducted on Jan-
uary 21, 1955, under the direction of the Acting Regional Director
for the Twentieth Region, among the employees of the Employer in
the unit found appropriate by the Board. At the close of the election
the parties were furnished with a tally of ballots which showed that of
Approximately 13 eligible voters, 6 were cast for the Petitioner and
7 were cast for Oakland Printing Pressmen and Assistants Union,
Local 125, AFL, hereinafter referred to as the Intervenor.
On January 27, 1955, the Petitioner filed objections to the election.
The Acting Regional Director investigated the objections and on Feb-
ruary 3, 1955, issued a report on objections, in which he found that the
Petitioner's objections were without merit and recommended that they
be overruled. The Petitioner thereafter filed timely exceptions to part
of this report.
As no exceptions were filed to the Acting Regional Director's recom-
mendation that the Petitioner's first objection be overruled, we adopt
this recommendation.
In its second objection, the Petitioner alleged in substance that a rep-
resentative of the Intervenor was present about the polls during the
election, unlawfully influencing the employees participating therein.
The Acting Regional Director found that Fred Brooks, the Inter-
venor's business agent, was on the Employer's property while the bal-
loting was in progress, but that Brooks did not electioneer nor enter
the area of the polling place. On these facts the Regional Director con-
cluded that the presence of Brooks on the Employer's premises did
not constitute sufficient basis for setting aside the election.
In its exceptions, the Petitioner asserts that throughout the election
Brooks held a conversation with the Employer's plant manager out-
side, but near the door to, the balloting room,2 a location which em-
ployees had to pass on their way to vote. It contends that Brooks was
thereby electioneering 7 in that his conversation with the plant man-
ager was, under all the circumstances, including the past bargaining
relationship between the Intervenor and the Employer, a "demonstra-
Not reported in printed volumes of Board Decisions and Orders.
By letter dated February 16, 1955, filed in support of the Acting Regional Director's
report, the Intervenor asserts that the conversation between Brooks and the plant man-
ager was held some 58 feet from the entrance to the balloting room.
3 An election rule of the Board prohibits electioneering during the course of an elec-
tion at or near the polling place
111 NLRB No. 176
1094 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
tion of amiability" which must have indicated to employees that the
Employer preferred a victory by the Intervenor at the polls.
Even assuming the facts to be as alleged by the Petitioner, we find
insufficient basis in the exceptions for setting aside the election. In
so holding, we reject as too speculative in character the inference which
the Petitioner would have us draw as to the impact upon employees of
the conversation in question.' And the exceptions do not advert to any
other evidence which would support a finding of electioneering or other
improper conduct on the part of Brooks at or near the polling place.
In the circumstances, we do not regard Brooks' presence on the Em-
ployer's premises during the election as sufficient grounds for setting
aside the election.' We therefore find that the Employer's second
objection is without merit and it is hereby overruled.
Because the tally shows that a majority of the valid votes have
been cast for the Intervenor, we shall certify the Intervenor as the
collective-bargaining representative of the employees in the appro
priate unit.
[The Board certified Oakland Printing Pressmen and Assistants
Union, Local 125, AFL, as the designated collective bargaining repre-
sentative of the employees in the unit found appropriate.]
4 It is noted that there is nothing in the record to indicate that the observer for the
Petitioner at any time objected to Brooks ' presence Furthermore , at the close of the
election the Petitioner 's representative certified that the "balloting was fairly conducted,
that all eligible voters were given an opportunity to vote their ballots in secret, and that
the ballot box was protected in the interest of a fair and secret vote "
5 Cf. Gastonia Combed Yarn Corporation , 109 NLRB 585 , wherein the Board pointed
out that "the mere presence of union representatives at or near the polling place, without
proof of electioneering or other improper conduct, is not prejudicial and insufficient
grounds for setting aside an election "
HAMMOND-HOI3MAN CORPORATION D/B/A YORK DRESS SHOPS and RE-
TAIL CLERKS UNION LOCAL 1460, RETAIL CLERKS INTERNATIONAL
ASSOCIATION, AFL, PETITIONER. Case No. 13-RC-3484. March
23,1955
Supplemental Decision and Certification of Representatives
Pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election l issued on Decem-
ber 14, 1954, an election by secret ballot was conducted on January
12, 1955, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Direc-
tor for the Thirteenth Region, among the employees of the Employer
in the unit designated in the Decision and Direction of Election, to
determine whether or not they wished the Petitioner to represent them
for the purposes of collective bargaining. Thereafter, a tally of bal-
I Not reported in printed volumes of Board Decisions and Orders
111 NLRB No. 184.