Regal Aluminum, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 29, 1969

179 N.L.R.B. 431 (N.L.R.B. 1969)

REGAL ALUMINUM, INC. 431
Regal Aluminum , Inc. and District Lodge 71,
International Association of Machinists &
Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO. Cases 17-CA-3291
and 17-RC-5462
October 29, 1969
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION
BY MEMBERS BROWN, JENKINS, AND ZAGORIA
On June 14, 1968, the National Labor Relations
Board issued its Decision and Order in the
above-entitled proceeding,' finding that the
Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in
certain unfair labor practices in violation of Section
8(a)(1) and (5) of the National Labor Relations Act,
as amended, and ordering the Respondent to cease
and desist therefrom and take certain affirmative
action designed to effectuate the policies of the Act,
including bargaining with the Union The Board
also set aside the representation election conducted
in Case 17-RC-5462 and directed the dismissal of
that case in its entirety.
On June 16, 1969, the Supreme Court of the
United States issued its opinion in N.L R.B. v.
Gissel Packing Company, 395 U S 575, affirming
generally the Board's use of authorization cards in
determining a union's majority status and the
Board's power to issue a bargaining order based
upon such showing where the employer's unfair
labor practices had a tendency to undermine the
Union's majority and impede the election process.
Thereafter, the United States Court of Appeals
for the Eighth Circuit remanded the instant
proceeding to the Board for reconsideration in the
light of the Supreme Court's opinion in Gissel On
August 6, 1969, the Board issued a Notice
permitting the parties to file statements of position
with respect to the application of Gissel to this
proceeding. Subsequently, Respondent, the Charging
Party, and the General Counsel filed timely
statements in support of their respective positions
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the
National Labor Relations Board has delegated its
power in connection with this case to a three-
member panel.
1171 NLRB No 189
We have again reviewed the entire record,
including the statements of position, and, having
reconsidered the matter, affirm our original finding
and order in this respect for the reasons stated
below
In our initial Decision we found in agreement
with the Trial Examiner that the Respondent
violated Section 8(a)(1) by Coercively interrogating
and polling employees concerning union activities
and sympathies; creating the impression surveillance
of union meetings and other activities; and
promising and granting insurance and
hospitalization plans and other benefits, including a
better Christmas bonus and improved lunchroom
facilities, in order to induce employees to refrain
from supporting the Union. The Board also found
that at the time of its original bargaining request the
Union represented a majority of the Employer's
employees in an appropriate unit and was entitled to
recognition as their exclusive collective-bargaining
representative, and that the employer, by insisting
upon an election in the absence of a good-faith
doubt and employing the time thus gained to
dissipate the Union majority, violated Section
8(a)(5), and issued a bargaining order.
In view of the standards set forth in the Supreme
Court's opinion in Gissel, we find, that by refusing
to bargain with the Union and by engaging in a
series of unfair labor practices to undermine the
Union's majority status the Respondent violated
Section 8(a)(5). The coercive effects of Respondent's
unfair labor practices cannot be eliminated by cease
and desist remedies, and were of such a nature as to
make a fair election doubtful, if not impossible.
Under these circumstances, the purposes of the Act
can better be effectuated by reliance on the
employees' desires as expressed by signed
authorization cards than on the results of a rerun
election. Therefore, the bargaining order previously
issued to remedy the Employer's unfair labor
practices is appropriate to remedy its violations of
Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act, and we shall
affirm it.
SUPPLEMENTAL ORDER
Based on the foregoing, and the entire record in
this case, the National Labor Relations Board
hereby affirms its Order issued in this proceeding on
June 14, 1968.
179 NLRB No. 69