SCM Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 13, 1969

174 N.L.R.B. 515 (N.L.R.B. 1969)

SCM CORPORATION 515
SCM Corporation, Marchant Operations and
Communications Workers of America, AFL-CIO,
Petitioner . Case 11-RC-2754
February 13, 1969
DECISION AND DIRECTION
BY CHAIRMAN MCCULLOCH AND MEMBERS
FANNING AND ZAGORIA
Pursuant to an Order and Direction of Second
Election, an election by secret ballot was conducted
on September 19, 1968, under the direction and
supervision of the Regional Director for Region 11,
among the employees in the unit agreed upon by the
parties in the Stipulation for Certification upon
Consent Election. At the conclusion of the election,
the parties were furnished with a tally of ballots
which showed that of approximately 1218 eligible
voters, 1057 valid votes were cast, of which 530 were
for, and 527 were against the Petitioner, and 18
ballots were challenged. The challenged ballots were
sufficient in number to affect the results of the
election. Thereafter, both the Employer and
Petitioner filed timely objections to conduct
affecting the results of the election. On November 4,
1968. the Petitioner withdrew its objections.
Pursuant to the provisions of the National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations, the
Regional Director conducted an investigation of the
issues raised by the challenges and the Employer's
objections and on November 12, 1968, issued and
served upon the parties his Report on Challenges
and Objections, in which he recommended that the
challenges to ballots cast by 14 employees be
sustained, that the challenges to the ballots cast by
Peggy Hughes, Frances C. Keefe, W. G. Morris,
and Maurice G. McWaters, be overruled and that
their ballots be opened and counted. The Regional
Director further recommended that the Employer's
objections be overruled. Thereafter, the Employer
filed timely exceptions to the Regional Director's
recommendations, and the Petitioner filed a reply
brief.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the
National Labor Relations Board has delegated its
powers in connection with this case to a
three-member panel.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board
finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within
the meaning of the Act and it will effectuate the
purposes of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein.
2. The Petitioner is a labor organization claiming
to represent certain employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists
concerning the representation of the employees of
the Employer within the meaning of Section 9(c)(1)
and Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The parties agreed, and we find, the following
employees constitute a unit appropriate for the
purpose of collective bargaining within the meaning
of the Act:
All hourly paid production and maintenance
employees, including utility men, linemen,
leadmen and probationary employees; but
excluding all exempt and non-exempt salaried
employees, professional employees, temporary
employees, supervisory employees, and guards as
defined in the Act.
5. The Board has considered the Regional
Director's Report on Challenges and Objections, the
Employer's exceptions thereto, and the Petitioner's
reply brief, and hereby adopts the Regional
Director's findings and recommendations.' As we
have adopted the Regional Director's
recommendation that the challenges to the ballots of
Peggy Hughes, Frances C. Keefe, W. G. Morris,
and Maurice G. McWaters, be overruled and as
these ballots may affect the results of the election,
we shall direct that the Regional Director open and
count such ballots and cause to be served on the
parties a revised tally of ballots.
DIRECTION
It is hereby directed that, as part of his
investigation to ascertain the representative for
purposes of collective bargaining with the Employer,
the Regional Director for Region 11 shall, pursuant
to the Board's Rules and Regulations, within 10
days from the date of this Direction, open and count
the ballots cast by Peggy Hughes, Frances C. Keefe,
W. G. Morris, and Maurice G. McWaters, and
'The exceptions , in our opinion , raise no material issue of fact or law
which would warrant reversal of the Regional Director's recommendations
Member Fanning would not adopt the Regional Director 's finding that
employee Nancy Boltin was in a nonunit classification at the time voter
eligibility was determined . In his opinion , the evidence set forth in Exhibit
K of the Employer 's exceptions, which the Petitioner agrees is accurate,
establishes that during the eligibility period, employee Boltin was on layoff
status awaiting recall to a unit classification . Accordingly, on the basis of
this evidence , and the agreement of the parties that Boltin was an eligible
voter, he would overrule the challenge to her ballot and direct that it be
counted. In all other respects , Member Fanning is in agreement with the
result reached , herein Chairman McCulloch and Member Zagoria differ
In their view, Exhibit K does not establish that dunng the eligibility period
Boltin was awaiting recall to a unit classification . The facts show that on
May 10, 1968, she was granted a leave of absence , to begin on June 14,
1968 and end on December 14 , 1968, from the nonunit job of timekeeper,
a salaried job which is excluded as such from the stipulated unit On
August 12, 1968, however, she applied to return to her prior job, and was
told it was not available but that an hourly-paid (unit) job could be
offered . Boltin replied that she would consider the offer She was laid off
(a clerical entry ) on August 12, with the understanding that she could
return to a unit job On September 9, 1968, she accepted a unit job_ Thus,
during the eligibility period which ended August 23 , 1968, she was on
layoff status from a nonunit job, and therefore ineligible to vote in the
election . The fact that during the eligibility period, Boltin was weighing an
offer to return to a unit job does not ipso facto make her a unit employee
at the time . Essentially, her position is no different from an applicant who
has an offer of employment but has not accepted it until after the
eligibility period.
Contrary to the Employer 's contention , we find that further proceedings
are not warranted
174 NLRB No. 89
516 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
thereafter prepare and cause to be served upon the count of the above-mentioned ballots, and the
parties a revised tally of ballots including therein the appropriate certification.