Western Electric Co., Inc.

318 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD (2) All plant guards employed at the Employer's Bloomfield, New Jersey, Works, excluding all other employees and all supervisors as defined in the Act. [Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication in this, volume.] WESTERN ELECTRIC COMPANY, INCORPORATED and COMMUNICATIONS WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER. Case No. 35-RC-528. September 21, 1951 Decision and Direction On June 19, 1951, pursuant to the terms and conditions of a Stipu- lation for Certification Upon Consent Election, the Regional Director conducted an election by secret ballot among certain employees of the Employer at its manufacturing division in Marion County, Indiana. Upon the conclusion of the election, a tally of ballots was furnished the parties in accordance with the Rules and Regulations of the Board and in conformity with the Stipulation. The tally shows that of 4,378 eligible voters, 1,905 votes were cast for the Communications Workers of America, CIO, hereinafter referred to as the CWA, 1,725 votes were cast for the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL, hereinafter referred to as the IBEW, and 144 votes were cast against the participating labor organizations, and that there were 58 challenged ballots.' Thereafter, on June 25, 1951, the IBEW filed timely objections to the conduct of the election and to conduct affecting the results of the election. In accordance with the Board's Rules and Regulations, the Regional Director investigated the objections. On July 20, 1951, the Regional Director issued and duly served upon the parties his report on challenged ballots and objections to election, in which he made cer- tain recommendations concerning the objections and recommended that the Board find ineligible 17 of the challenged voters, find eligible 31 of the challenged voters, declare 3 challenged ballots void, and defer ruling on the disposition of 7 challenged ballots until the issu- ance of a supplemental tally of ballots. The IBEW filed exceptions to certain parts of the Regional Director's report. 'Of the 58 challenged ballots, 54 were challenged by the Board's agents, 3 ballots counted by the Board's agent in charge of the election as void were challenged by the CWA, and 1 ballot was challenged jointly by the CWA and the IBEW. 96 NLRB No. 55. 1' WESTERN ELECTRIC COMPANY, INC. 319 Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board has delegated-its powers in connection with this case to a three-mem- ber panel [Chairman Herzog and Members Murdock and Styles]. Upon the entire record in the 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. 2. 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. 3. In accordance with the stipulation of the parties, we find that all production and maintenance employees of the Employer at its Manufacturing Division in Marion County, Indiana, excluding all office and clerical employees and all professional employees, guards, sergeants, firemen (watch and fire service), utility man (fire pro- tection), and supervisors as defined in the Act, constitute a unit ap- propriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the mean- ing of Section 9 (b) of the Act. 4. No exceptions were made to the Regional Director's recommenda- tions regarding the challenged ballots, and we hereby adopt the find- ings and recommendations of the Regional Director as to the disposi- tion of the challenges. Accordingly, we overrule the -challenges to the ballots of the following persons and find that they were eligible to vote: Dorothy H. Davis C. A. Wilner (Willner) E. L. Dorris Kathryn Wilson Mildred Ragsdale Nellie L. Wilson Beulah P. Specht Lena Irene Shipp Bernard Stolzman A. M. Sbabo Joseph M. Lee L.llie Anderson R. W. Johnson Sarah (S. D.) Barton Harry Brown M. A. Blankenship Margaret P. Burrows Elizabeth M. Brinker Ona C. Roll Delma (Delya) L. Clemmons Shirley H. Wade Julia Cloud J. E. Field (Fields) Mary S. Glover Raymond E. Kennedy Josephine Beam Keller Irma Lockhart P. F. McDaniel J. McClurkin W. S. Vores M. M. Reid 320 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD We sustain the challenges to'the ballots of the following persons and find that they are not eligible to vote : Thomas A. Clark G. L. (G. J.) Reed John Crawford Anne K. VonFoerster Cale Griffith (Jr.) Annie W. Moad James Gill Richard E. Dunlap M. M. Levinsky J. F. McCullough M. W. Johnson Flora Condit Jno. B. Lewis (Jr.) ' Betty Harrison George Phillips Norma Haywood Wm. H. Woodford As to the three challenged void ballots, we overrule the challenges and find that the ballots are void and as such are not to be counted. As recommended by the Regional Director we defer ruling upon the ballots of the following persons who were challenged in connec- tion with objection 4 discussed hereafter in paragraph 5: Evelyn Cecrle Nellie M. Pennington Lounoma L. Coats (Nettie) Alma W. Glaze Neva' Schooley Yolanda Mingus D. W. Wilson 5.; As no party excepted to the findings of the Regional Director as to objections to the election numbered 1, 2, 5, and 6 in the Regional Director's report, we adopt his findings and overrule the objections. However, exceptions were filed by the IBEW to the findings of the Regional Director as to the following objections : Objection No. 3.-It is alleged by the IBEW that a false and mis- leading handbill was circulated by the CWA the day prior to the elec- tion. The Regional Director reports that said handbill contained no coercive threats or promises of benefit calculated to restrain employees in the exercise of their voting privileges . We believe that this hand- bill falls into the category of customary preelection campaign propa- ganda. Therefore, we overrule the objection. Objection No. 4.-The IBEW alleges that the use of 9 ballots which did not belong in this election influenced the voting. Inadvertently, 9 ballots prepared for a previous election were intermingled with the ballots in this election . These erroneous ballots permitted a vote for or against Local 135, International Brotherhood of Teamsters , Chauf- feurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America , AFL. The correct ballots for the election in the'instant proceeding permitted a vote for the IBEW, for the CWA, or for neither. Concerning this objection the Regional Director reported the fol- lowing facts : Eight erroneous ballots were found in the ballot box and were tallied as void ballots . One erroneous ballot was given a voter at poll 3 about 4: 30 o'clock, an hour before the close of the WESTERN ELECTRIC COMPANY, INC. 321 polls, and that voter returned it and received a correct ballot. About 5 o'clock an employee of department 454, which department had voted at about 4: 30, returned to poll 3 and explained to the Board agent that she had voted an erroneous type ballot. The Board agent per- mitted this employee to vote a challenged ballot and advised her that if any other employees in her department had voted erroneous ballots she should tell them to return to the poll. Six other employees then came to the polls, stated they had voted erroneous ballots, and • cast challenged ballots shortly before the closing of the polls at 5: 30. The Regional Director concluded that the IBEW's objection was without merit unless the results of the election would be affected by eight votes. We agree with his conclusion. The IBEW urges, however, that the employees who cast erroneous ballots discussed the incident before re- turning to work and in this manner led others to believe that the AFL union involved in this election was the Teamsters and not the IBEW, and thereby may have induced employees to vote for the opponent ofi the IBEW or to refrain from voting at all. We find no merit in this argument. The notices of election in this proceeding gave due notice of the proper participants in the election. Moreover, any doubt which may have arisen if knowledge of`the existence of the erroneous ballots was spread throughout the plant, would have been removed from the mind of each voter by a look at his ballot before he cast it. We shall defer final ruling upon objection 4, however, until the supplemental tally of ballots has been prepared 2 Objection No. 7.-The IBEW alleges that the CWA by using the same color scheme on its campaign buttons as that of the buttons worn by the Board agents and election observers endeavored to confuse and mislead the voters as to the position and standing of CWA with the National Labor Relations Board. Although the color scheme of the NLRB official buttons was the same as that used by the CWA, the let- tering was of different size calling attention to the different wording on the buttons, and the size of the buttons was dissimilar. We do not believe the use of these buttons by the CWA in any way restrained the free choice of any voter. We therefore adopt the Regional Direc- tor's findings and overrule this objection. Direction As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur- poses of collective bargaining with the Employer, the Regional Direc- tor for the Ninth Region shall, pursuant to the Rules and Regulations of the Board, impound the ballots of Evelyn Cecrle, Lounoma L. Coats, Alma W. Glaze, Yolanda Mingus, Nellie M. Pennington (Nettie), 1 2 See Boeing Airplane Company, 88 NLRB 227. 322 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Neva Schooley, and D. W. Wilson, and within ten (10) days from the date of this Direction, open and count the ballots of Dorothy H. Davis, E. L. Dorris, Mildred Ragsdale, Beulah P. Specht, Bernard Stolzman, Joseph M. Lee, R. W. Johnson, Harry Brown, Margaret P. Burrows, Ona C. Roll, Shirley H. Wade, J. E. Field (Fields), Raymond E. Kennedy, Irma Lockhart, J. McClurkin, M. M. Reid, C. A. Wilner (Willner), Kathryn Wilson, Nellie L. Wilson, Lena Irene Shipp, A. M. Sbabo, Lillie Anderson, Sarah (S. D.) Barton, M. A. Blanken- ship, Elizabeth M. Brinker, Delma (Delya) L. Clemmons, Julia Cloud, Mary S. Glover, Josephine Beam Keller, P. F. McDaniel, and W. S. gores, and thereafter prepare and cause to be served upon the parties a Supplemental Tally of Ballots, including the count of said chal- lenged ballots. MATHEWS LUMBER COMPANY, INC. and UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF CARPENTERS AND JOINERS OF AMERICA, AFL . Case No. 2O-CA-354. September 04,1951 Decision and Order On April 13, 1951, Trial Examiner Robert L. Piper issued his Inter- mediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor practices, and recommending that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the copy of the Inter- mediate Report attached hereto. The Trial Examiner also found that the Respondent had not engaged in certain other unfair labor practices alleged in the complaint and recommended the dismissal of those allegations. Thereafter, the Respondent filed exceptions to the Intermediate Report and a supporting brief. The Board:' has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed. The rul- ings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the Intermediate Report, the exceptions and brief, and the entire record in the case, and hereby adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Trial Examiner with the following addition and modification : 1. We reject the Respondent's contention that McDade was a sup- ervisory employee within the meaning of Section 2 (11) of the Act and that for this reason the Respondent's failure to rehire McDade during the 1950 season was not a violation of the Act. McDade was I Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Mem- bers Houston , Reynolds, and Murdock]. 96 NLRB No. 52.