Miami Paper Board Mills, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 31, 1956

115 N.L.R.B. 1431 (N.L.R.B. 1956)

MIAMI PAPER BOARD MILLS, INC. 1431
nonpartisan, and therefore clearly constituted an election speech.'
Accordingly, we find that as these remarks were made within the 24-
hour period immediately preceding the election, the Employer violated
the Peerless Plywood rule, and we will order that the election be set
aside.
In his report the Regional Director found that the Employer is en-
gaged in a seasonal business and recommended that a new election be
directed on a date to be determined by the Regional Director at or
about the time of the employment peak of the Employer's next sea-
son. As no exceptions were filed to this recommendation, we will
adopt it.
[The Board set aside the election of December 8,1955.]
[Text of Direction of. Second Election omitted from publication.]
4 General Motors Corporation, Bwick Motor Division, 108 NLRB 1207; see also Riblet
Welding and Mfg. Corp., 112 NLRB 712.
Miami Paper Board Mills , Inc., Benner Box Company, and Simco
Waste Paper, Inc. and International Printing Pressmen and
Assistants' Union of North America , AFL-CIO, Petitioner.
Cases Nos. 10-RC-3249 and 1O-RU-.M9. May 31, 1956
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF
RESULTS OF ELECTION
Pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election issued herein on
December 21, 1955,1 an election by secret ballot was conducted on
January 20, 1956, under the direction and supervision of the Regional
Director for the Tenth Region, among the employees in the unit
found appropriate by the Board. Following the election, a tally of
ballots was furnished the parties.2 The tally shows that of approxi-
mately 155 eligible voters, 154 cast valid ballots, of which 40 were for
the Petitioner, 99 were against the Petitioner, and 15 were challenged.
Thereafter, the Petitioner filed timely objections to conduct affecting
the results of the election. The Regional Director investigated the
matter and, on April 9, 1956, issued and duly served on the parties his
report on election, objections to election, and recommendations to the
Board, in which he found that the objections did not raise material
and substantial issues and recommended that they be dismissed. On
May 1, 1956, the Petitioner filed exceptions to report on the election,
objections to election, and recommendations to the Board.
i Not reported in printed volumes of Board Decisions and Orders.
9 The Petitioner's representative refused to sign the tally of ballots on its face, but
signed it on the reverse side acknowledging service.
115 NLRB No. 280.
1432 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The Board has considered the Petitioner's objections, the Regional
Director's report, the Petitioner's exceptions, and the entire record in
this case, and hereby adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommen-
dations of the Regional Director for the following reasons :
The objections allege, in summary, that: (1) The Employer made
coercive remarks; (2) supervisors escorted employees to the polls;
(3) the Employer's observer during the election made improper re-
marks to voters; (4) the Employer's superintendent made various
motions and signs to voters until he was directed to leave the area
adjacent to the voting place; (5) a foreman entered the voting place
during the election and paid the Employer's observer with a check in
the presence of voters ; and (6) the Employer had agreed to close the
Benner plant during the election so all employees could vote at the
same time but failed to do so.
The Regional Director finds that: (1) He was precluded from
considering the two alleged coercive remarks as they occurred prior
to the date of issuance of the Board's Decision and Direction of Elec-
tion; 3 (2) the fact that supervisors escorted employees to the polls
did not warrant setting aside an election;' (3) the Board agent, by
reprimanding the Employer's observer for his remarks and explain-
ing the situation to the very small percentage of employees involved,
nullified the effect of the remarks in question; (4) the superintendent's
action in walking past one of the polling places on his way to the
office and waving at an employee leaving the polling place was too
minor to warrant setting aside the election; (5) the paycheck was
handed to the Employer's observer, the election being held on payday,
by a nonsupervisory employee at a time when no voter was present;
and (6) the Employer complied with the voting arrangements re-
quested by the Board, and, as all but 1 out of 155 eligible voters cast a
ballot, ample opportunity had evidently been afforded the employees
to go to the polls.
The Petitioner admitted in its exceptions that "We are quite aware
that the Regional Director's statement of the instances which occurred
as' a part of this election do not sound extremely serious, . . ." and,
further, that "On the surface, the Regional Director's conclusions were
apparently substantiated. . . ." The Petitioner contends, neverthe-
less, that when the incidents in question "are placed in a highly charged
and vociferously expressed antiunion atmosphere, . . ." they establish
that the employees were deprived of their freedom of choice of a
bargaining representative.
Other than such generalizations, the exceptions advance nothing
to substantiate the contention that the Regional Director' s findings
should be reversed. Furthermore, we find nothing in the objections
F. W. Woolworth Co., 109 NLRB 1446.
Garner Aviation Service Corporation, et at., 114 NLRB 298.
FURNITURE CITY UPHOLSTERY COMPANY 1433
to substantiate the Petitioner's contention that the election atmos-
phere was so charged with Employer antiunion sentiment that the
employees were prevented from a free expression-of opinion. We
therefore find, in agreement with the Regional Director, that the ob-
jections do not raise substantial or material issues with respect to
conduct affecting the results of the election. Accordingly, we hereby
overrule the objections. As the Petitioner did not receive a majority
of the votes cast in the election, we shall certify the results of the
election.
[The Board certified that a majority of the valid ballots was not
cast for International Printing Pressmen and Assistants' Union of
North America, AFL-CIO, and that International Printing Press-
men and Assistants' Union of North America, AFL-CIO, is not the
exclusive bargaining representative of the employees of Miami Paper
Board Mills, Inc., Benner Box Company, and Simco Waste Paper,
Inc.]
Furniture City Upholstery Company and Upholsterers' Inter-
national Union of North America, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case
No. 7-RC-92690. June 1, 1956
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND CERTIFICATION -
OF REPRESENTATIVES
On September 28, 1955, pursuant to a Decision, Order, and Direc-
tion of Second Election, issued in the above-entitled proceeding on
August 31, 1955,1 an election by secret ballot was conducted under
the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Seventh
Region, among the employees in the unit stipulated by the parties?
Upon the conclusion of the election, a tally of ballots was furnished
the parties. The tally shows that of approximately 114 eligible voters,
110 cast ballots, of which 55 were for the Petitioner, 53 were against
the Petitioner, 1 was challenged, and 1 was void.
On October 4,1955, the Employer filed timely objections to conduct
affecting the results of the election. The Regional Director inves-
tigated the objections and on February 10,, 1956, issued and duly
served upon the parties a report on objections. In this report, the
Regional Director found that the objections were without merit and
recommended that they be overruled and the Petitioner certified.
Thereafter, on February 20, 1956, the Employer filed exceptions to
1 Not reported in printed volumes of Board Decisions and Orders.
I On February 23, 1955 , the parties executed a stipulation for certification upon con-
sent election. An election in the stipulated unit was conducted on March 9, 1955. The
Board 's Decision o f August 31, 1955, set aside that election and ordered a second elect
tion in the same stipulated unit.
115 NLRB No. 234.