Reliable Electric Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 12, 1977

230 N.L.R.B. 797 (N.L.R.B. 1977)

RELIABLE ELECTRIC CO.
Reliable Electric Company and International Brother-
hood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO. Case 11-
CA-6802
July 12, 1977
DECISION AND ORDER
BY MEMBERS JENKINS, PENELLO, AND
WALTHER
On May 12, 1977, Administrative Law Judge Irwin
H. Socoloff issued the attached Decision in this
proceeding. Thereafter, Respondent filed exceptions
and a supporting brief, and the General Counsel filed
an answering brief in response to Respondent's
exceptions.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the
National Labor Relations Board has delegated its
authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
The Board has considered the record and the
attached Decision in light of the exceptions and
briefs and has decided to affirm the rulings, find-
ings,' and conclusions of the Administrative Law
Judge and to adopt his recommended Order.
ORDER
Pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor
Relations Board adopts as its Order the recommend-
ed Order of the Administrative Law Judge and
hereby orders that the Respondent, Reliable Electric
Company, St. Stephens, South Carolina, its officers,
agents, successors, and assigns, shall take the action
set forth in the said recommended Order, except that
the attached notice is substituted for that of the
Administrative Law Judge.
I The Respondent has excepted to certain credibility findings made by
the Administrative Law Judge. It is the Board's established policy not to
overrule an Administrative Law Judge's resolutions with respect to
credibility unless the clear preponderance of all of the relevant evidence
convinces us that the resolutions are incorrect. Standard Dr)' Wall Products.
Inc.. 91 NLRB 544 (1950), enfd. 188 F.2d 362 (C.A. 3. 1951). We have
carefully examined the record and find no basis for reversing his findings.
APPENDIX
NOTICE To EMPLOYEES
POSTED BY ORDER OF THE
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
An Agency of the United States Government
WE WILL NOT interrogate employees concern-
ing their knowledge of union activity.
WE WILL NOT threaten to close our plant if the
employees select a union as their collective
bargaining representative.
230 NLRB No. 123
WE WILL NOT create the impression of surveil-
lance of employees' union activity.
WE WILL NOT, in any like or related manner,
interfere with, restrain, or coerce employees in the
exercise of their rights under Section 7 of the Act
to engage in concerted activities for their mutual
aid and protection, or to refrain from such
activity.
All our employees are free to become or remain
members of International Brotherhood of Electrical
Workers, AFL-CIO, or any other labor organization
of their choosing, or to refrain from becoming or
remaining members of any labor organization.
RELIABLE ELECTRIC
COMPANY
DECISION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
IRWIN H. SOCOLOFF, Administrative Law Judge: Upon
charges filed on November 4, 1976, by International
Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, herein
referred to as the Union, against Reliable Electric Compa-
ny, herein called the Respondent, the General Counsel of
the National Labor Relations Board, by the Regional
Director for Region 11, issued a complaint dated January
3, 1977, alleging violations by the Respondent of Section
8(a)(1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended, herein called the Act. Respon-
dent, by its answer, denied the commission of any unfair
labor practices.
Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held before me in
Georgetown, South Carolina, on April 5, 1977, at which the
General Counsel and the Respondent were represented by
counsel and were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to
examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce
evidence. Thereafter, the parties filed briefs which have
been duly considered.
Upon the entire record in this case, and from my
observation of the witnesses, I make the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. JURISDICTION
Respondent, a Delaware corporation, is engaged in the
production of electrical utility products at its St. Stephens,
South Carolina, plant. During the year preceding issuance
of the complaint, a representative period, Respondent
received, at its St. Stephens plant, goods and materials
valued in excess of $50,000 which were shipped from points
located outside the State of South Carolina. In that same
time period, Respondent shipped products valued in excess
of $50,000 from its St. Stephens plant to points located
outside the State of South Carolina. I find that Respondent
is an employer engaged in commerce within the meaning of
Section 2(2), (6), and (7) of the Act.
797
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
II. LABOR ORGANIZATION
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-
CIO, is a labor organization within the meaning of Section
2(5) of the Act.
III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
Respondent is charged with three separate violations of
Section 8(a)(l) of the Act, arising out of two alleged
conversations, between its supervisors and rank-and-file
employees. Those conversations, in late August and early
September 1976, occurred against a background of organi-
zational activity conducted by the Union among Respon-
dent's approximately 130 unit employees. Respondent,
concededly, became aware of that activity in late June or
early July. Thereafter, Plant Manager John Hortman
conducted meetings of the plant supervisors and instructed
those supervisors, in some detail, to avoid the commission
of unfair labor practices.
Raymond Lee Pettigrew worked for Respondent as a
material handler until laid off in September 1976. Earlier,
in June of that year, Pettigrew signed a union authorization
card. According to his credited, uncontradicted testimony,
in the latter part of August 1976, Pettigrew was approached
by his supervisor, Ann Bunton, who asked "if I knew
anything about a union, and I told her 'yes' and she said
not to join the union because if the union came in the
plant, the plant would close down and she did not want to
lose her job." Based on that testimony, I find that
Respondent, through its supervisor, Bunton, interrogated
Pettigrew concerning his knowledge of union activity, and
threatened to close its plant if the employees selected the
Union as their collective-bargaining representative, in
violation of Section 8(a)(1) of the Act.
Buster Grant worked for Respondent as a material
handler until laid off on October 23, 1976. On September
14, 1976, Grant attended a meeting held at the home of a
fellow employee. There, in the presence of some five to
eight other employees, he signed a union authorization
card. Grant testified that, later that same day, while at his
work station, he was approached by his supervisor, Isaac
Middleton, who stated: "I heard that you were at a union
meeting this afternoon." Middleton denied ever discussing
union activity with Grant. Based upon demeanor impres-
sions of the two witnesses, I credit Grant's testimony and
discredit Middleton's denial. I find that Respondent,
through its supervisor, Middleton, created the impression
of surveillance of employee union activity, in violation of
Section 8(a)(l) of the Act.
I further conclude, contrary to Respondent's conten-
tions, that a remedial order is required in this case in order
to effectuate the policies of the Act. While Respondent has
no prior history of unfair labor practice conduct, and made
efforts to avoid the commission of unfair labor practices
during the course of the instant organizational campaign,
Respondent is, nonetheless, responsible for the conduct of
its statutory supervisors. Those supervisors engaged in
serious violations of the Act and Respondent has not made
I In the event no exceptions are filed as provided by Sec. 102.46 of the
Rules and Regulations of the National Labor Relations Board, the findings,
conclusions, and recommended Order herein shall, as provided in Sec.
voluntary efforts to remedy the effects of the unlawful
conduct.
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
UPON COMMERCE
The activities of the Respondent set forth in section III,
above, occuring in connection with Respondent's opera-
tions described in section I, above, have a close, intimate,
and substantial relationship to trade, traffic, and commerce
among the several States and tend to lead to labor disputes
burdening commerce and the free flow of commerce.
V. THE REMEDY
Having found that Respondent has engaged in unfair
labor practices in violation of Section 8(a)(XI) of the Act, I
shall recommend that it be ordered to cease and desist
therefrom and take certain affirmative action designed to
effectuate the policies of the Act.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Reliable Electric Company is an employer engaged
in commerce, and in operations affecting commerce, within
the meaning of Section 2(2), (6), and (7) of the Act.
2. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers,
AFL-IO, is a labor organization within the meaning of
Section 2(5) of the Act.
3. By interfering with, restraining, and coercing its
employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in
Section 7 of the Act, Respondent has engaged in and is
engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of
Section 8(a)(l) of the Act.
4. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor
practices effecting commerce within the meaning of
Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
Upon the foregoing findings of fact, and conclusions of
law, and pursuant to Section 10(c) of the Act, I hereby
issue the following recommended:
ORDER 1'
The Respondent, Reliable Electric Company, St. Ste-
phens, South Carolina, its officers, agents, successors, and
assigns, shall:
I. Cease and desist from:
(a) Interrogating employees concerning their knowledge
of union activity.
(b) Threatening to close its plant if the employees select a
union as their collective-bargaining representative.
(c) Creating the impression of surveillance of employees'
union activity.
(d) In any like or related manner interfering with,
restraining, or coercing employees in the exercise of their
rights under Section 7 of the Act to engage in concerted
activities for their mutual aid and protection, or to refrain
from such activity.
2. Take the following affirmative action necessary to
effectuate the policies of the Act:
102.48 of the Rules and Regulations, be adopted by the Board and become
its findings, conclusions, and Order, and all objections thereto shall be
deemed waived for all purposes.
798
RELIABLE ELECTRIC CO.
(a) Post at its St. Stephens, South Carolina, facility,
copies of the attached notice marked "Appendix." 2 Copies
of said notice, on forms provided by the Regional Director
for Region 11, after being duly signed by Respondent's
representative, shall be posted by it immediately upon
receipt thereof, and be maintained by Respondent for 60
consecutive days thereafter, in conspicuous places, includ-
2 In the event the Board's Order is enforced by a Judgment of a United
States Court of Appeals, the words in the notice reading "Posted by Order
of the National Labor Relations Board" shall read "Posted Pursuant to a
ing all places where notices to employees are customarily
posted. Reasonable steps shall be taken to insure that said
notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other
material.
(b) Notify the Regional Director for Region 11, in
writing, within 20 days from the date of this Order, what
steps Respondent has taken to comply herewith.
Judgment of the United States Court of Appeals Enforcing an Order of the
National Labor Relations Board."
799