Belk's Department Store of Savanah, Georgia, Inc.

280 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD BELK's DEPARTMENT STORE OF SAVANNAH, GEORGIA, INC. and RETAIL CLERKS INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION, LOCAL UNION 1604, AFL,' PETITIONER. Case No. 10-RC-1079. February 25, 1952 Supplemental Decision and Order On April 6, 1951, pursuant to the Decision and Direction of Election 1 issued herein on March 7, 1951, an election by secret ballot was conducted among the employees in the appropriate unit. The tally of ballots issued after the election showed that of 40 valid bal- lots cast, 13 were for and 27 against the Petitioner, and that 7 ballots were challenged. On April 13,1951, the Petitioner filed objections to election. There- upon, in accordance with the Board's Rules and Regulations, the Re- gional Director conducted an investigation, and on August 15, 1951, issued and duly served upon the parties a report on objections. In his report, the Regional Director found that certain conduct of super- -visors and employees of the Employer raised substantial and material issues with respect to the conduct of the election, and recommended that the election be set aside. On September 5, 1951, the Employer filed exceptions to the Regional Director's report. Thereafter, on Sep- tember 14, 1951, the Board issued an order directing hearing, in which it remanded the case to the Regional Director for the purpose of con- ducting a hearing on the issues raised by the Employer's exceptions. The hearing was held on October 11 and 12, 1951, before John H. Garver, hearing officer. The Petitioner and the Employer appeared and participated. On December 3,1951, the hearing officer issued and served upon the parties his report on objections to conduct of election, it copy of which is attached hereto, in which he recommended that the election be set aside. The Employer filed timely exceptions to the hearing officer's report on objections to conduct of election. The Board 2 has reviewed the rulings of the hearing officer and finds that no prejudicial error was committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the hearing officer's report, the exceptions, and the entire record in the case, and hereby adopts the findings and recommendations of the hearing officer for the following reasons: The hearing officer found, as set forth in his report, that on the morning of the election, while the voting was taking place, employees Katherine Game and Margaret Newsome stood directly inside the rear door of the Employer's store, with payroll lists in their hands, and checked the names of the employees as they went out the door 193 NLRB 729. 2 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-member panel [ Chairman Herzog and Mem- bers Houston and Murdock]. 98 NLRB No. 46. BELK'S DEPARTMENT STORE OF SAVANNAH, GA., INC . 281 to the polling place. He further found that, during this time, various supervisors of the Employer, and particularly Manager Galloway, were standing near and about the employees in the same area .s On the basis of these findings, the hearing officer concluded that the . conduct of Game and Newsome in checking the voting employees, and the presence of Manager Galloway and other supervisors around the employees near the polling place constituted interference affecting the results of the election 4 The Employer does not contest the hearing officer's findings of fact. However, it excepts to his concluding findings on the grounds that : (1) Game and Newsome were not supervisors and were not shown to have been in any sense acting under the direction of the Employer or in its behalf ; (2) it was not shown that the checking of the names of the employees by Game and Newsome did in fact interfere with, restrain, or coerce the employees or tend to do so; (3) Manager Galloway and the other supervisors were not shown to have been present in such proximity to the polling place as to constitute inter- ference with the employees' voting; and (4) it was not shown that the supervisors said or did anything at or near the polling place such as would constitute interference with the employees' voting or the free and fair conduct of the election.5 We find no merit in these contentions. It is true, as the Employer asserts, that Game and Newsome were not supervisors, and there is no evidence that they were acting under the direction of the Employer in checking the voters. In the interest of free elections, however, it is the policy of the Board to prohibit anyone from keeping any list of persons who have voted, aside from the official eligibility list used to check off the voters as they receive their ballots .s Moreover, in this case the activities of Game and New- 8 The employees gathered inside the store, near the rear door, while waiting to go to the polling place , which was located in a warehouse behind the store. Galloway admittedly spent approximately 70 to 80 percent of the time during which the polling took place in walking back and forth in the space-about 35 feet wide-between the back of the store and the warehouse , and on at least two occasions entered the store and walked through the group of employees waiting to vote Other supervisors were, at various times, in the immediate vicinity of this group of employees. + As set forth in the hearing officer's report , the record further shows that after working hours on the day before the election , the Employer called a meeting of the employees at which Galloway made remarks evidencing his opposition to the Petitioner, and that Down- ing, one of the Employer's supervisors , on the same day interrogated one of the employees as to her union attitude and asked another to vote his way. For -the reasons set forth in his report , the hearing officer found that this conduct did not constitute interference with the election . In the absence of any exceptions by the Petitioner, we adopt these findings. 5 The Employer also excepts to the hearing officer's findings on the ground that the Petitioner did not base its objections to the election on the conduct of Game and Newsome or the presence of supervisors near the polling place. However, these matters were revealed by the Regional Director 's investigation of the Petitioner 's objections . As it is well estab- lished that the jurisdiction of the Regional Director in making a post-election investigation is not limited to-the issues raised by the parties , we find no merit to the Employer 's conten- tion. Hobart Manufacturing Company, 92 NLRB 203, 205, and cases therein cited. 9 International Stamping Co., Inc., 97 NLRB 921. 282 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD some were carried on in the presence of supervisors, who raised no objection to their conduct. Under these circumstances, we find that the conduct of Game and Newsome tended to prevent a choice of representatives in a free atmosphere. We are also convinced that, even though the supervisors were at some distance from the actual polling place, and apparently said nothing calculated to restrain or coerce the employees, their presence in the area where the employees were gathered while waiting to vote tended to interfere with the employees' freedom of choice of a bargain- ing agent. In particular, we regard as improper Galloway's conduct in walking back and forth in the space which the employees were re- quired to traverse to go to the polling place. In view of the above findings, we believe that the purposes of the Act will best be effectuated by setting the election aside. When the Regional Director advises the Board that the circumstances permit the free choice of a bargaining representative, we shall direct that a new election be held among the employees concerned. Order IT Is HEREBY ORDERED that the election held on April 6, 1951, among the employees of Belk's Department Store of Savannah, Georgia, Inc., be, and it hereby is, set aside. STANDARD OIL COMPANY ( INDIANA ) and CENTRAL STATES PETROLEUM UNION LOCAL 115, AFFILIATED WITH CENTRAL STATES PETROLEUM UNION, NATIONAL,1 PETITIONER. Case No. 14-BCi-1690. February 25, 1959 Decision and Direction of Election Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Milton O. Talent, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed .2 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-member panel [Chairman Herzog and Members Houston and Styles]. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds: 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain em- ployees of the Employer. I The name of the Petitioner appears as amended at the hearing. 2 The hearing officer reserved for Board decision the Employer's motion to dismiss the petition on the ground that the alleged unit was inappropriate in that it purported to include confidential employees . We find no merit in this motion and it is hereby denied. 98 NLRB No. 34.