Meyer & Welch, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 17, 1949

85 N.L.R.B. 706 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

In the Matter Of MEYER & WELCH, INC., EMPLOYER and, INTERNA-
-'TIONAL UNION , UNITED AuTomoBILE , AIRCRAFT AND AGRICULTURAL
IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMERICA, UAW-CIO, PETITIONER
Case No. 21-RC-794. Decided August 17,1949
DECISION
AND
ORDER
On May 18, 1949, pursuant to a "Stipulation for Certification Upon
Consent Election," an election by secret ballot was conducted under
the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Twenty-
first Region (Los Angeles, California). At the conclusion of the elec-
tion the parties were furnished with a Talley of Ballots which shows
that of the 260 eligible voters, 244 cast ballots. Of these, 94 were for
the Petitioner, and 150 were cast against the Petitioner. No other
labor organization was on the ballot.
On May 25, 1949, the Petitioner filed Objections to the Election
alleging that a letter circulated by a representative of the Employer,
inside of the plant and immediately prior to the balloting, contained
threats to the employees designed to dissuade them from voting for
the Petitioner and that the circulation of this letter was in violation
of an agreement among the parties concerning electioneering. There-
after, the Regional Director investigated the objections and, on June
20, 1949, issued and served upon the parties a Report on Objec-
tions to the Election, in which he found that said objections did not
raise substantial and material issues with respect to the conduct or
results of the election, and recommended that they be overruled.
Exceptions to the Report on Objections were then filed by the
Petitioner.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds: 1
1. The alleged threats contained in the Employer's letter: The
Regional Director found that on the day of the election, a letter from
the Employer was circulated to the employees but that the contents
of that letter were protected under Section 8 (c) of the Act, as
' Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as
amended, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three- member
panel [Members Houston, Reynolds, and Murdock].
85 N. L. R. B., No. 129.
706
MEYER & WELCH, INC. 707
amended. The Petitioner excepts to this finding alleging that state-
ments in the letter were meant to convey threats of economic reprisal
to the employees. There is no controversy as to the contents of the
letter which was mainly an account of the economic position of the
Employer's plant. We agree with the Regional Director that no.
threat appears except by inference so tenuous as to be nonexistent.
We find, therefore, that the letter circulated by the Employer did not
interfere with the election and we shall overrule the objection.2
2. The alleged breach of an agreement as to electioneering: The
Regional Director found that nearly all copies of the letter were
distributed during the afternoon rest period between 2: 30 p. m. and
2: 40 p. in. on the day of the election. He also found that no formal
agreement as to circulation of campaign literature was made other
than the instructions given by the Board representative to the parties,
at a preelection conference lasting from 2: 30 p. in. to 2: 50 p. m. on
the same day. These instructions were that no electioneering at or
near the polling place during the hours of the election would be
permitted. Although the Petitioner does not claim that the letters
were distributed during voting hours, which began at 3: 00 p. in., it
contends that the circulation was contrary to an agreement of the
parties made during the conference that afternoon. There was no.
allegation or showing that the electioneering rules announced by the
Board's representative were violated by the circulation of the letters..
Moreover, even accepting Petitioner's allegation that there was an
agreement pertaining to the distribution of campaign literature, the
distribution of the letter, as the Regional Director pointed out, could
not have amounted to a breach, inasmuch as the major circulation took
place before the conference ended. We find, therefore, that there was
no substantial interference with the conduct of the election and we
shall overrule the obj ection.
As we find that the Objections to the Election filed by the Petitioner
do not raise substantial and material issues of fact, we deem it un-
necessary to order a hearing in this case.' Upon the basis of the fore-
going findings of fact, we hereby overrule the Petitioner's Exceptions
to the Report on Objections and adopt the Regional Director's find-
ings and recommendation. Accordingly, as the Tally of Ballots shows
that no collective bargaining representative has been chosen, we shall
dismiss the petition herein.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition filed herein be, and it hereby
is dismissed.
' See Matter of L. H. Butcher Company , 81 N. L. R. B. 1184 , and cases cited therein.
3 See Matter of Craddock-Terry Shoe Corporation, 80 N. L. R. B. 1239.
857829-50-vo1.85 46