Land O'Frost of Arkansas, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 9, 1980

252 N.L.R.B. 1 (N.L.R.B. 1980)

LAND O'FROST OF ARKANSAS, INC.
Land O'Frost of Arkansas, Inc. and Food Handlers
Local 425, affiliated with United Food and
Commercial Workers' International Union,
AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case 26-RC-6179
September 9, 1980
DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF
RESULTS OF ELECTION
BY CHAIRMAN FANNING AND MEMBERS
JENKINS AND PENELLO
Pursuant to authority granted to it by the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board under Section 3(b) of
the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a
three-member panel has considered objections to an
election' held on April 25, 1980, and the Regional
Director's report recommending disposition of
same. The Board has reviewed the record in light
of the exceptions and briefs, and hereby adopts the
Regional Director's findings and recommenda-
tions. 2
As found by the Regional Director, the Employ-
er's personnel director, Robert W. Bohannon, and
various supervisors told employees at their work
stations on the day of the election that they should
vote and that if they were undecided a "no" vote
would be appreciated. It is undisputed that at least
half the eligible employees were contacted in this
matter.
In finding this conduct not to be objectionable,
the Regional Director relied on our recent decision
in Electro-Wire Products, Inc., 242 NLRB 960
(1979). In that case we held that the employer's
conduct in making brief comments individually to
employees at their work stations and telling them
that the employer hoped that they would vote
"no" did not amount to a speech to a massed as-
sembly of employees and therefore did not fall
within the proscription of such speeches within 24
hours prior to an election enuniciated in Peerless
Plywood Company, 107 NLRB 427 (1953). Inas-
much as the facts herein are almost identical to
those in Electro-Wire Products, Inc., supra, we find
3 The election was conducted pursuant to a Stipulation for Certifica-
tion Upon Consent Election. The tally was: 138 votes for, and 158
against, the Petitioner; there were 3 void and I challenged ballots, an in-
sufficient number to affect the results.
s In the absence of exceptions, we adopt, pro forma, the Regional Di-
rector's recommendation that Petitioner's objections 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 be
overruled.
that case controlling and that the conduct of Bo-
hannon and the other supervisors was not objec-
tionable. We shall therefore certify the results of
the election.
CERTIFICATION OF RESULTS OF
ELECTION
It is hereby certified that a majority of the valid
ballots have not been cast for Food Handlers Local
425, affiliated with United Food and Commercial
Workers' International Union, AFL-CIO, and that
said labor organization is not the exclusive repre-
sentative of all the employees, in the unit herein in-
volved, within the meaning of Section 9(a) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended.
CHAIRMAN FANNING, dissenting:
For the reasons stated in my dissent in Electro-
Wire Products, Inc., 242 NLRB 960 (1979), I would
not adopt the Regional Director's recommendation
that Petitioner's Objection I be overruled.
The facts herein are essentially undisputed. On
the day of the election, Robert W. Bohannon, the
Employer's personnel manager, talked to at least
half of the eligible voters at their work stations ad-
jacent to the polling place on two occasions, pre-
ceding and during the conduct of the election. In-
dividual supervisors, including James Mylam, also
spoke to employees on the production lines on the
day of the election. They all conveyed the same
message that, inter alia, a "no" vote in the election
would be appreciated, if the employee was unde-
cided how to vote in the election. These facts are
similar to those in Electro-Wire Products, Inc., supra,
where I emphasized that talks by management to
individual employees at their work stations within
24 hours of an election was tantamount to an ad-
dress to a captive audience and as such violated
Peerless Plywood.3 My colleagues here, as in Elec-
tro-Wire Products, Inc., supra, in adopting the Re-
gional Director's recommendation to overrule the
Petitioner's Peerless Plywood based objection, have
mistakenly permitted again an employer to accom-
plish indirectly precisely that which Peerless Ply-
wood directly proscribes. For this reason, I would
sustain the objection, set aside the election, and
direct a second election.
3 Peerless Plywood Company, 107 NLRB 427 (1953).
252 NLRB No. I
I