Myrtle Desk Co.

In the Matter Of MYRTLE DESK COMPANY, EMPLOYER and UNITED FURNITURE WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER Case No. 51,V-R-84.Decided November 17,1947 DECISION AND ORDER Following the filing of a petition on April 22, 1947, alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Employer, and requesting an investigation and certification of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Na- tional Labor Relations Act, the parties entered into a "Stipulation for Certification Upon Consent Election." In accordance with the stipulation and the Rules and Regulations of the Board, a run-off election was conducted on August 21, 1947, before the effective date of the amendments to the statute. It appears from the Tally of Ballots that the Petitioner received a majority of the valid votes cast. No objections to the run-off election have been filed by any of the parties within the time provided therefor. On August 22, 1947, amendments to the National Labor Relations Act became effective.' Sections 9 (f) and (h) of the Act, as amended, preclude the Board from investigating any question concerning repre- sentation raised by a labor organization unless that labor organization has fulfilled certain registration and filing requirements and has fur- nished to its members copies of financial reports required to be filed. The Petitioner has not complied with the requirements of these sub- sections. On October 29, 1947, however, it filed with the Board a motion for oral argument on the question of the issuance of a certifi- cation by the Board despite such non-compliance. We have already ruled that, absent compliance, the provisions of Sections 9 (f) and (h) preclude the Board from continuing investi- gations which were pending before the Board when the amendments took effect.2 But the Petitioner here contends that certification by the 1 Labor Management Relations Act, 1947, Public Law 101, Eightieth Congress, Pest Session 2 Matter of Rite-Pores Cot set Company, 75 N L It B 174, i^sue0 November 4, 1947 ^5N.L R. B, No 29 226 MYRTLE DESK COMPANY 227 Board is merely the performance of a ministerial act, requiring no exercise of judgment or discretion, and is not a part of the investi- gative procedure. We find this contention to be without merit. We regard the certifi- cation as a step, albeit the final step, in investigations conducted pur- suant to Section 9 (c).3 Despite some ambiguity, moreover, we believe that Subsections 9 (f), (g) and (h), taken as a whole, reflect an inten- tion on the part of Congress completely to debar non-complying unions from access to the Board's processes in representation cases.' We further reject the Petitioner's contention that a failure to issue the requested certification would violate the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.' The motion for oral argument is denied. Inasmuch as the labor organization receiving a majority of the votes cast in the election is ineligible for certification, we shall order the in- vestigation closed. ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the investigation of the question concern- ing the representation of employees of the Employer initiated upon petition of United Furniture Workers of America, CIO, be, and the same hereby is, closed. -8 See N. L R. B. v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, 308 U S 413, 415; Inland Empire District Council, Lumber d Sawmill Workers Union, et at. v. Millis, et al, 325 U S. 697, 707. 4 Compare the provisions of Section 9 (f) with those of Section 9 (g), which provides that no labor organization "shall be eligible for certification as the representative of any employees" unless it can show that it has kept annually up to date , and furnished annually to its members, the data required respectively to be filed and furnished under Section 9 (f) 5 See Matter of Rite-Form Corset Company, supra