D. W. Onan & Sons

In the Matter of DAVID W. ONAN. C. WARREN ONAN AND ROBERT D. ONAN, PARTNERS, D/B/A D. W. ONAN & SONS and LOCAL 1139, UNITED ELECTRICAL. RADIO '& MACHINE WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO Case No. 18-R-&?2 SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND ORDER July 5, 1944 On November 3, 1943, pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election issued by the Board herein on October 15 , 1943,1 an elec- tion by secret ballot was conducted under the supervision and direc- Lion of the Regional Director for the Eighteenth Region (Minne- apolis, Minnesota ). On November 4, 1943, the Regional Director issued and duly served upon the parties an Election Report. As to the balloting and its results, the Regional Director reported as fol- , lows: Total ballots cast----------------------------------------- 1,503 Total ballots challenged----------------------------------- 28 Total valid votes counted-------------------------------- 1,473 Votes cast for United- Electrical, Radio & Machuie Workers of America, CIO-------------------------------------- 530 Votes cast against aforementioned union ------------------- 943 Total void ballots--- ------------------------------------- 2 On November 10, 1943, the Union filed Objections to the election alleging, in substance, that the Company had engaged in certain con- duct preventing a free choice of representatives. Thereafter the Re- gional Director investigated the Objections and on December 15, 1943, issued and duly served upon the parties a Report on Objections. He found that the objections raised substantial and material issues with respect to the election and reconnnended that the Board hold a hearing thereon. On January 1, 1944, the Board, having duly considered the matter, determined that the Objections did raise substantial and material 152 N I. R It 1421 -57 N L. R. B, No 11. 68 J D. W. ONAN & SONS 69 issues with respect to the election, and issued an order directing it hearing thereon and referring, the case to the Regional Director for the purpose of conducting a hearing. Such hearing was held at Min- neapolis, Minnesota , on February 14 and 15, 1944, before Williani E. Spencer, Trial Examiner. The Board, the Company, and the Un- ion appeared, participated, and were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evi- dence bearing on the issues. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were afforded opportunity to file briefs with the Board. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following: SUPPLEMENTAL FINDINGS OF FAC'r On October 15, 1943, the Board issued its Decision and Direction of Election in the instant proceeding. On September 13, October 28 and 30, and November 1, 1943, respectively, the Company addressed written communications to all of its employees. These letters were purportedly issued in reply to union circulars. During October 1913, Joe Wagner, a supervisor in the Generator Department, told employee Irma Volkert that the employees might not continue to get their bonus if they joined the Union, and "foremen or anyone else might not get it." Don Biggins, another supervisor, told a group of employees in October 1943, according to the credible testimony of employee George Snook, that in the event the Union won the election the working tirrie would be cut to 40 hours per week. At that time the male employees were working 59 hours,,and the female employees 50 hours. Biggins testified with respect to this incident that he told the group that at an- other Minneapolis plant operating under a union contract hours were limited to 40 to 44 hours per week, but admitted that the employees- could reasonably have inferred from his remarks that the Union was responsible for the limitation. About the same time Wagner de- clared, in substance, that no benefits would, be derived from paying clues to the Union, and disparaged the union leaders as "racketeers" unable to gain additional advantages for working men, and stated that other labor organizations had caused trouble at other plants in Minne- apolis. The letter,of October 28, 1943, alluded to above, referred to the approaching election and phrased the issue as determining whether the 'employees are to be represented by the Union "or whether you want to continue as we have in the past, discussing your own matters individually without a union to represent you.", It emphasized the importance of all employees voting and the secrecy of the ballot. It suggested further that the employees in voting should question "What t 70 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD kind of leadership are you going to entrust your future with the Com- pany?" "Is it selfish, or is it iiot?" "Is it interested in your own per- sonal welfare or is it self-seeking?" "On the basis of its own past record is it open and above board, or don't you know?" ' The letter of October 30, also issued in response to a Union circular, outlined the various benefits that the Company's employees were en- joying over employees in another plant in'Minneapolis in which the employees were represented by the Union. The letter of November 1, 1943, is of the same general character as the October 30 letter.' The Company in this letter attacked the Union's promise of job security and closed with an appeal to all employees to vote. Whatever might be our views as to the propriety of the letters of September 13, October 28 and 30, and November 1, 1943, if they stood alone, we, find that the letters when appraised as they must be, in con- nection with the totality of the Company's conduct during the period in question, and particularly the oral statements of Wagner,and Big- gins, described above, not only constituted to the employees an ex- pression of the writer's views, but carried with them an intimation of economic reprisal should the employees fail to to heed their employer's obvious wishes. We find the Company's above-described course of conduct during the period preceding the election prevented an ex- pression by the employees therein of their free and uncoerced wishes as to representation. We shall, therefore, set the election aside. We shall 'direct a new election at such time as the Regional Director ad- vises us, that the circumstances permitting a free choice among the employees have been restored. ORDER It is hereby ordered that 'tlie election held on November 3,,1943, among the employees of David W. Onan, C. Warren Onan, and Robert - D. Onan, partners, d/b/a D. W. Onan & Sons, Minneapolis, Minne- sota, be, and it hereby is, set aside.