Southern Wood Preserving Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 10, 1950

89 N.L.R.B. 1243 (N.L.R.B. 1950)

In the Matter Of SOUTHERN WOOD PRESERVING COMPANY, EMPLOYER
and UNITED GAS, COKE & CHEMICAL WORKERS OF AMERICA , C. I. 0.,
PETITIONER
Case No. 10-RC-791.-Decided May 10, 1950
DECISION
AND
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
On December 14, 1949, pursuant to a stipulation for certification
upon consent election, an election by secret ballot was, conducted among
the employees of the stipulated unit under the direction and super-
vision of the Regional Director for the Tenth Region. Upon the com-
pletion of the election, a Tally of Ballots was issued and duly served
by the Regional Director upon the parties concerned.
The Tally showed that the votes were distributed as follows :
Approximate number of eligible voters--------------------- 139
Void ballots---------------------------------------------- 1
Votes cast for Petitioner (United Gas, Coke, & Chemical
Workers of America (CIO)) ----------------------------- 59
Votes cast for International Chemical Workers Union (AFL) - 22
Votes cast for United Chemical Workers South, Local 116__ 35
Votes cast against participating labor organizations-_-----_ 1
Valid votes counted-------------------------------------- 117
Challenged ballots---------------------------------------- 0
On December 21, 1949, the International Chemical Workers
Union, AFL, hereinafter called the Intervenor, filed objections to con-
duct of the election and conduct affecting the results of the election.
Following investigation, the Regional Director on February 24, 1950,
issued a Report on Objections, in which he found that none of the ob-
jections raised substantial issues and recommended that all be over-
ruled. On March 6, 1950, the Intervenor duly filed exceptions to the
Regional Director's Report.
Upon the basis of the entire record in this case, the Board makes
the following findings of fact :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the National Labor Relations Act.
89 NLRB No. 124.
1243
1244 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
2. The labor organizations involved herein claim to represent em-
ployees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9
(c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and '(7) of the Act.
4. The Intervenor's objections do not raise material or substantial
issues with respect to the election for the following reasons :
Objection No. 1
The Intervenor objected to the conduct of Petitioner, in that it
engaged in unlawful and improper activities at or near the polling
place during voting hours on election day. The Regional Director
recommended that this objection be found to be without merit. Since
no exceptions were filed to this recommendation, the objection will
not be further considered.
Objection No. 2
Intervenor objects that one of the participating unions, United
Chemical Workers, South, Local 116, engaged in unlawful and im-
proper electioneering activities at or near the polling place during
voting hours on election day. The Regional Director's investigation
revealed that one Granger, a representative of Local 116, escorted by
a watchman who was going to vote, left the gate where Granger had
been distributing pamphlets, which was about 200 feet from the poll-
ing place, to go to the rest room at the rear of the office building. On
leaving the rest room ahead of the watchman, Granger stopped at a
juncture of walks leading, respectively, to the office building and
to the inspector's office where the polls were located. At this juncture
which is about 40 feet from the polling place, Granger spoke for a
moment to one employee and then to a group of some four or five
employees, inquiring whether they had voted and explaining the ballot
to them and the advantages of his union. This incident, which was
the only one of its kind, occurred during the time it took the watch-
man to walk the 60 feet from the rest room to the voting place. ' Other-
wise, the balloting went on without incident and all the parties signed
the certification of conduct of the elections.
The Intervenor contends that the Regional Director's report, by
this finding, admits the violation of an agreement between the parties
that no electioneering should be done within 50 feet of the polling
place, and that therefore the election should be set aside.' However,
3 The Intervenor states that it did not participate in this agreement and that in any event
it did not violate its terms.
SOUTHERN WOOD PRESERVING COMPANY 1245
assuming the existence of a technical violation of the parties' agree=
ment with respect to electioneering in the vicinity of the polls, the
record fails to show that Granger's conduct was a wilful violation of
either Board rules,2 or an agreement of the parties. Furthermore,
we do not find this single incident to have been of such a character
as likely to have had an effect upon the election results.3
Objection No. 3
The Intervenor further objects on the ground that an alleged "su-
pervisor" coerced and intimidated an employee in the election. The
Regional Director found that there was some evidence to the effect
that a rank-and-file employee, classified as a crosstie central unloading
station operator, threatened another employee with loss of economic
benefits, if he voted for the independent union. He found that this
operator performs the duty of loading and unloading crossties; that he
also does some inspecting, incident to this job; that he works with
some seven other semiskilled employees, and punches a clock as they
do; and that he does not have the authority to hire, fire, discipline,
reward, or effectively recommend such action. It. appears that these
operators have always been represented in prior union contracts and
the parties agreed that they were eligible to vote.
No factual issue with respect to the Regional Director's finding
concerning the duties of this operator, as revealed by the investigation,
is raised by the Intervenors-exceptions. The Intervenor, in its excep-
tions, merely disputes the Regional Director's conclusion that the
crosstie operator is not a supervisor. The Intervenor offers no other
evidence to support its contention that the operator is a supervisor
within the meaning of the Act. We have held that where the objecting
party, as here, fails to cite, in support of his contention, any specific
evidence as having not been considered by the Regional Director, we
must rely upon the Regional Director's findings.4 Accordingly, we
find the Intervenor's Objection 3 to be without merit.5
5. All production and maintenance employees and watchmen of the
Employer at its East Point, Georgia, plant, but excluding office clerical
'Cf. The Kilgore Manufacturing Co., 45 NLRB ' 468, where the Board found a wilful
violation of a material and salutary election rule.
3 J. I. Case Company, 85 NLRB 576 ; Swift & Company , 88 NLRB 1021.
' Stonewall Cotton Mills , 78 NLRB 28 ; Armstrong Cork Company , Inc., Case No. 3-11C-
158.
5In its exceptions to the Regional Director 's report on challenges , the Intervenor raised
new objections to the conduct of the election . We cannot consider such objections as having
a proper place in exceptions to a report on challenged ballots. Treated as a supplement to
its original objections to the conduct of the election , we find that such objections are
untimely . J. I. Case Company , 85 NLRB 5.76.
1246 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
employees, professional employees, supervisors, and guards, constitute
a unit' appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within
the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act c
As the Tally. of Ballots shows that the Petitioner has secured a
majority of the valid votes cast in the election, we shall certify the
Petitioner as the bargaining representative of the employees in the
appropriate unit.
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that the United Gas, Coke & Chemical Work-
ers of America, C. 1. 0., has been designated and selected by a majority
of the employees of the Southern Wood Preserving Company in the
emit hereinabove found appropriate, as their representative for the
purposes of collective bargaining, and that pursuant to Section 9 (a)
of the Act, the said organization is the exclusive bargaining agent of
all such employees for the purposes of collective bargaining with
respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of employment, and other con-
ditions of employment.
CHAIRMAN HERZOG and MEMBER STYLES took no part in the consid-
eration of the above Decision and Certification of Representatives.
9 This unit is consistent with the agreed unit set forth in the Stipulation for Certification
upon Consent Election.