Multiband Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Unpublished Board Decisions

Oct 26, 2011

07-RC-023336 (N.L.R.B. Oct. 26, 2011)

1
NOT INCLUDED IN PBH
BOUND VOLUMES Novi, MI
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
MULTIBAND, INC.
Employer
and Case 7-RC-23336
LOCAL 243, INTERNATIONAL
BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS
Petitioner
DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF RESULTS OF ELECTION
The National Labor Relations Board has considered
objections to an election held on October 14 and 15, 2010, and
the hearing officer’s report recommending disposition of them.
The election was conducted pursuant to a Stipulated Election
Agreement. The tally of ballots shows 34 for and 96 against the
Petitioner, with 4 challenged ballots, an insufficient number to
affect the results of the election.
The Board has reviewed the record in light of the
exceptions and briefs,1 has adopted the hearing officer’s

1 The Union filed 14 objections, but withdrew Objections 7 and 9
during the hearing. The Union has excepted to the hearing
officer's recommendations to overrule Objections 3, 4, 8, and
Additional Objection 2. In the absence of exceptions, we adopt
pro forma the hearing officer's recommendations to overrule
Objections 1, 2, 5, 6, 10, 11, and 12. Although the Union has
nominally excepted to the hearing officer’s recommendation to
overrule Additional Objection 1, it offers no supporting
rationale whatsoever in either its exceptions document or its
2
findings2 and recommendations,3 and finds that a certification of
results of election should be issued.
CERTIFICATION OF RESULTS OF ELECTION
IT IS CERTIFIED that a majority of the valid ballots have
not been cast for Local 243, International Brotherhood of
Teamsters, and that it is not the exclusive representative of
these bargaining unit employees.
Dated, Washington, D.C., October 26, 2011.
______________________________
Mark Gaston Pearce, Chairman
______________________________
Craig Becker, Member

brief. We therefore adopt pro forma the hearing officer’s
recommendation to overrule that objection.
2 The Union has implicitly excepted to some of the hearing
officer’s credibility findings. The Board’s established policy
is not to overrule a hearing officer’s credibility resolutions
unless the clear preponderance of all the relevant evidence
convinces us that they are incorrect. Stretch-Tex Co., 118 NLRB
1359, 1361 (1957). We have carefully examined the record and
find no basis for reversing the findings.
3 We adopt the hearing officer’s recommendation to overrule
Objection 3, alleging that the Employer promised employees
monetary incentives to vote against the Union. In so doing, we
do not rely on her finding that Employer consultant David
Acosta’s comments regarding the potential for “monetary changes”
after the election were too vague to constitute objectionable
conduct. Instead, we rely solely on her finding that Acosta’s
comments were heard by only 10 to 15 employees at a single
meeting, and the absence of evidence that his comments were
disseminated to other employees or repeated at other meetings
with employees. Given the wide margin of the election result, we
are unable to conclude that this single incident could have
affected the results of the election. See M.B. Consultants,
Ltd., 328 NLRB 1089 (1999).
3
______________________________
Brian E. Hayes, Member
(SEAL) NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD