Wilson-Sinclair Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 21, 1971

191 N.L.R.B. 341 (N.L.R.B. 1971)

WILSON-SINCLAIR CO. 341
Wilson-Sinclair Co. and Amalgamated Meat Cutters
and Butcher Workmen of North America, AFL-
CIO, Local P-3, Petitioner . Case 18-RC-8503
June 21, 1971
DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF
RESULTS
BY CHAIRMAN MILLER AND MEMBERS JENKINS
AND KENNEDY
Pursuant to a Stipulation for Certification Upon
Consent Election, an election was conducted on Janu-
ary 21, 1971, under the direction and supervision of the
Regional Director for Region 18, among the employees
in the stipulated unit. At the conclusion of the election,
the parties were furnished with a tally of ballots which
showed that of approximately 16 eligible voters, 16 cast
ballots, of which 5 were for, and 11 against, the Peti-
tioner.
On January 28, 1971, the Petitioner sent the follow-
ing telegram to the Regional Director:
Please be advised that the Amalgamated Meat
Cutters and Butcher Workmen of North America,
AFL-CIO, Local P-3 hereby file a protest to the
representation election held on January 21, 1971
at the Wilson-Sinclair Company, Cedar Rapids,
Iowa Case # 18-RC-8503 due to certain activi-
ties on the part of the Employer. Specific informa-
tion and affidavits will follow. Sincerely yours
A copy of the telegram was duly served on the Em-
ployer. On February 2, 1971, the Petitioner furnished
to the Regional Director a statement of the grounds
upon which its "protest" was based. On or about Feb-
ruary 15, 1971, the Petitioner furnished a copy of the
statement of grounds to the Employer.
The Regional Director conducted an investigation
and, on March 3, 1971, issued and duly served upon the
parties his Report and Recommendation on Objections
in which he found the objections timely filed and
recommended that the objections be sustained, the elec-
tion be set aside, and a new election be directed. There-
after, the Employer filed timely exceptions to the Re-
gional Director's Report and a supporting brief.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the Na-
tional 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 policies of
the Act to assert jurisdiction herein.
2. The Petitioner is a labor organization claiming to
represent certain employees of the Employer.
191 NLRB No. 62
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning
the representation of employees of the Employer within
the meaning of Section 9(c)(1) and Section 2(6) and (7)
of the Act.
4. The parties stipulated, and we find, that the fol-
lowing employees constitute a unit appropriate for the
purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of
Section 9(b) of the Act.:
All employees in Quality Control Department and
Laboratory Department at the Employer's Cedar
Rapids, Iowa, plant, including inspectors, special-
ists and laboratory personnel; excluding all other
employees,,chemists, assistant chemists, secretary
and supervisors as defined by the Act.
5. The Employer contends that Petitioners telegram
did not comply with Section 102.69(a) of the Board's
Rules and Regulations in that it did not contain a
sufficient "statement of the reasons" for the election
protest. The Employer also claims that, when Peti-
tioner filed its statement with the Regional Director
more than 5 days after the tally of ballots had been
furnished to it, such filing was untimely.
Section 102.69(a) of the rules provides, in part:
"Within 5 days after the tally of ballots has been fur-
nished, any party may file with the regional director
... objections to the conduct of the election or conduct
affecting the results of the election, which shall contain
a short statement of the reasons therefor. Such filing
must be timely... "
Petitioner's telegram of January 28, 1971, was not
sufficient to constitute proper objections in that it did
not contain any reason for the objections. The telegram
was no more than a notification to the Regional Direc-
tor that the objections would follow.' The statement,
subsequently supplied by Petitioner on February 2,
1971, was not filed within the 5-day period after the
tally of ballots had been furnished to the parties, and
was, therefore, untimely.' Accordingly, we find, con-
trary to the Regional Director, that timely objections
to the election have not been filed.
' Progressive Brass Foundry Co., Inc., 114 NLRB 963, Mission Appliance
Corporation, 104 NLRB 361; General Electric Company, 103 NLRB 108
2 Conlon Brothers Manufacturing Company, 88 NLRB 107, enfd 187 F.
2d 389 (C.A. 7), American Federation of Casino and Gaming Employees,
166 NLRB 544, 549, cases in fn. 1, ibid
In finding that Petitioner filed timely objections , the Regional Director
relied on Certain-Teed Products Corp, 173 NLRB No. 38. We find that case
inapplicable. In Certain-Teed the Board held that a union's specific objec-
tions, properly filed within the 5-day period and served on the employer,
satisfied the rules despite late service on the petitioning individual. More-
over, petitioner in Certain-Teed had not filed exceptions to the union's
failure to serve it
The Employer in the subject case further contended in its exceptions that
Petitioner failed to comply with Section 102.69(a) of the Rules and Regula-
tions in that it did not serve its statement of grounds immediately on the
Employer. Because the telegram initially filed failed for lack of specificity
to qualify as valid objections and the later filed statement was untimely, we
find it unnecessary to decide whether the statement was also faulty for lack
of service Member Kennedy would find Petitoner' s statement defective for
lack of service as well as on account of its untimeliness.
342 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
As proper objections have not been timely filed and
as the tally of ballots shows that Petitioner has not
received a majority of the valid ballots cast , we shall
certify the results of the election.
CERTIFICATION OF RESULTS OF ELECTION
has not been cast for Amalgamated Meat Cutters and
Butcher Workmen of North America, AFL-CIO, Lo-
cal P-3 , and that said labor organization is not the
exclusive representative of the employees in the unit
found appropriate within the meaning of Section 9(a)
of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended.
It is hereby certified that a majority of the valid votes