Phelps-Dodge Copper Products Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 15, 1955

111 N.L.R.B. 950 (N.L.R.B. 1955)

950 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
PHELPS-DODGE COPPER PRODUCTS CORPORATION and UNITED AUTO-
MOBILE, AIRCRAFT, & AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT WORKERS OF AMER-
ICA (UAW-CIO), PETITIONER. Case No. 21-RC-3736. March
15,1955
Supplemental Decision and Certification of Representatives
Pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election issued by the
National Labor Relations Board on November 4, 1954,1 a representa-
tion election was conducted on November 24, 1954, under the direction
and supervision of the Acting Regional Director for the Twenty-first
Region, among the employees of the Employer in the unit found
appropriate. Following the election, all parties were furnished a
tally of ballots. The tally indicated that of approximately 302
eligible voters, 260 cast valid ballots, of which 134 were for the Inter-
venor, Western Mechanics Local 700, International Union of Mine,
Mill & Smelter Workers,' 121 were for the Petitioner, and 5 were
against both participating labor organizations. There were no chal-
lenged or void ballots.
Thereafter, the Petitioner filed objections to conduct affecting the
results of the election. In accordance with the Rules and Regulations
of the Board, the Regional Director conducted an investigation and
duly issued and served upon the parties his report on objections. The
Regional Director found that the four objections filed by the Petitioner
were without merit, not raising substantial and material issues with
respect to conduct affecting the results of the election, and recom-
mended that the objections be overruled. The Petitioner filed timely
exceptions to the Regional Director's recommendation with respect to
its objections Nos. 1 and 4. As there are no exceptions to the Regional
Director's recommendation regarding objections Nos. 2 and 3, his
recommendations are hereby adopted.
Objection No. 1 alleged, and the Regional Director found, that the
Intervenor distributed a printed electioneering leaflet to employees on
company time and property on November 23, 1954, within the 24-hour
period preceding the election. Petitioner does not allege that the
textual matter of the leaflet is outside the protection of Section 8 (c)
of the Act, but urges that distribution of the material within 24 hours
before the election is objectionable. We find, in agreement with the
Regional Director, that distribution of the leaflet within 24 hours
before the election was not of itself ground for setting aside the
election.'
1 Not reported in printed volumes of Board Decisions and Orders
2 The Intervenor was permitted to intervene in this proceeding on the basis of its con-
tract with the Employer covering the employees in the unit , which expired November 1,
1954.
3 Crown Drug Company, 110 NLRB 845
111 NLRB No. 162.
PHELPS-DODGE COPPER PRODUCTS CORPORATION 951
The Regional Director also considered the question whether the
publication in the leaflet of a facsimile of the voting boxes of the
Board's official ballot with arrows pointing to, and an X marked under
the Intervenor's name, violated the rule of Allied Electric Products,
Inc., 109 NLRB 1270, which prohibits the reproduction of any docu-
ment purporting to be a copy of the Board's official ballot, other than
one completely unaltered in form and content and clearly marked
"sample" on its face. The boxes are reproduced on the bottom one-
third of the last page of the leaflet under a heading which reads "Mark
Your Ballot in the First Square on the Left Hand Side." 4 No other
portion of the ballot is reproduced nor is there any other material on
the page relating to the ballot. The Regional Director concluded that
the material reproduced by the Intervenor did not purport to be a copy
of the Board's official ballot within the meaning of the Allied case.
We agree with this conclusion. The basis of the Allied decision, as
clearly expressed therein, was the Board's concern that documents
used for campaign purposes must not tend to suggest that the Board
approves of any material appearing in the document. Without under-
taking to decide any more than the precise issue presented by the facts
in this case, we find that the here reproduction of three voting boxes
enclosed by dotted lines with markings indicating a proposed choice
to the voters, is not within the proscription of the Allied rule. The
material reproduced in this electioneering document is no more than
a graphic admonition to vote for a particular participant, without any
implication of Board approval. We shall therefore overrule this
objection and exception.
Objection No. 4 alleged that an employee named Parker, who is
president of the Intervenor, engaged in electioneering activity during
the afternoon voting period. The Regional Director found that after
signing the register to leave the plant Parker talked to some employees
for about 10 minutes on the steps of the guardhouse about 130 feet
from the polling place from which the entrance to the polling place
cannot be seen. The evidence does not show that Parker violated the
nonelectioneering limits surrounding the polling place, or that he
made any statements not privileged under Section 8 (c) of the Act.
Accordingly, we agree with the Regional Director that this incident
did not affect the results of the election, and shall therefore overrule
this objection and exception.'
We find that the Petitioner's objections and exceptions do not raise
substantial and material issues with respect to the conduct or results of
the election, and they are hereby overruled. As the Intervenor has
4 Petitioner also objects to the omission of the words "Mark an 'x' in the Square of your
Choice," which are contained immediately above the voting boxes on an official ballot,
and the omission of the letters "UAW-CIO" from the box containing Petitioner's name.
We do not consider these omissions to be of significance.
5 Calcor Corporation, 106 NLRB 539.
952 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
received a majority of the valid ballots cast, we shall certify the Inter-
venor as the collective-bargaining representative of the employees in
the appropriate unit.
[The Board certified Western Mechanics Local 700, International
Union of Mine, Mill & Smelter Workers as the designated collective-
bargaining representative of the employees of the Employer in the
unit found appropriate.]
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS , CHAUFFEURS, WARE-
HOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA, LOCAL 182, UTICA, NEW YORK
AND VICINITY , AFL, and HAROLD R . JONES. Case No. 3-CB-214.
March 16,1955
Decision and Order
On October 19, 1954, Trial Examiner Lloyd Buchanan issued his
Intermediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the
Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor
practices and recommending that it cease and desist therefrom and
take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the copy of the Inter-
mediate Report attached hereto. Thereafter, the Respondent filed ex-
ceptions to the Intermediate Report and a supporting brief.
The Board has reviewed the rulings made by the Trial Examiner
at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed. The
rulings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the Interme-
diate Report, the Respondent's exceptions and brief, and the entire
record in the case and hereby adopts the findings, conclusions, and rec-
ommendations of the Trial Examiner with the modifications indicated
hereinafter.
We agree with the Trial Examiner that the Respondent violated
Section 8 (b) (1) (A) and (2) of the Act by maintaining in collabo-
ration with The Lane Construction Corporation, a discriminatory
hiring practice based on union membership or clearance, by notifying
employees Jones and Zupan that they would be discharged because
they were not members of the Respondent and by causing the Com-
pany to discharge them for this reason.
Like the Trial Examiner, we find, contrary to the Respondent's con-
tention, that the Respondent was responsible for the acts of Parks in
maintaining the discriminatory conditions of employment at the con-
struction site and causing the discharges in question. Whether or not
Parks was formally appointed by officials of the Respondent as the
steward on the job, the record establishes that, to the Respondent's
knowledge, Parks was the acting steward performing the usual func-
tions of that office. Thus, Citro, the Respondent's business agent, testi-
fied that Parks was an acting steward on the job who handled griev-
111 NLRB No. 156.