Bonded Freightways, Inc.

216 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD fore, whether its insistence on these conditions constituted a denial of the right of the employees " to hear both sides of the story under circumstances which reasonably approximate equality." 4 Group ' meetings, as the hearing officer found , would have imposed on Baker the necessity of repeating her speech. We do not believe, however , that this would have been so burden- some as to have interfered with an adequate presentation of the Petitioner ' s case, nor do we believe the fact that the Union could not address all the employees simultaneously is here material . Neither are we persuaded that the mere presence of Herring would have created a prejudiced atmos- phere.5 Under the circumstances , therefore , we are of the opinion that the Employer ' s offer afforded the Petitioner an opportunity to reply to Yeager's speech under substantially equal conditions . We therefore hold that the Employer's conduct did not constitute interference with the election. Accordingly , we hereby overrule the Petitioner ' s objection No. 1. As we have overruled the objections to the election, and as the tally of ballots shows that the Petitioner lost the election, we shall issue a certification of results of election to this effect. [The Board certified that a majority of the valid ballots was not cast for Retail Clerks International Association, Local 1179, AFL, and that the said labor organization is not the exclusive representative of the employees of the Employer in the stipulated unit.] 4Bonwit Teller, Inc , supra. 5 There is no evidence that Herring intended to participate in the meetings except by his presence. As the purpose of the meetings was merely to permit Baker (a nonemployee) to address the employees , the situation is clearly distinguishable from those cases in which the Board has found that an employer 's presence at a union meeting constitutes unlawful interference with the employees ' rights. BONDED FREIGHTWAYS, INC. and BONDED DRIVERS AND MECHANICS INDEPENDENT UNION, Petitioner . Case No. 3-RC-1110. May 29, 1953 SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES Pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Elections , ' elections by secret ballot were conducted on April 2 and 3, 1953, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Third Region, among the employees in the voting groups set forth in the above -mentioned Decision . The Petitioner appeared on the ballot in all the elections ; Local 182, International i 103 NLRB 407. 105 NLRB No. 27. BONDED FREIGHTWAYS, INC. 217 Brotherhood of Teamsters , Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers, A.F. of L., appeared on the ballot in the election for voting group 1 and its sister Local, 294, appeared on the ballot in the election for voting group 3 . Thereafter tallies of ballots were furnished the parties showing that in voting groups 1, 4, and 5, a majority of the ballots cast were for the Petitioner, in voting group Z a majority of the ballots were cast against the Petitioner , and in voting group 3 of approximately 18 eligible voters, 11 voted for the Petitioner , none voted for Local 294, and there were 7 challenged ballots . On April 6, 1953, Local 294 filed timely objections to the election held among the em- ployees in voting group 3.2 In accordance with the Board ' s Rules and Regulations, the Regional Director conducted an investigation of the matter raised by Local 294' s objections and, on April 20, 1953, issued and duly served upon the parties his report on objections, in which he found that the objections were nothing more than post -election challenges and recommended that the objections be overruled and dismissed . Thereafter , Local 294 filedtimely exceptions to the report on objections. 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 [Members Murdock, Styles, and Peterson] Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds: The objections to the election allege in substance that the Employer refused the request of a representative of the Re- gional Director to permit Local 294, which was on strike at the time of the election , to check the eligibility of the employees in voting group 3 in advance of the election so that it could properly challenge voters at the election . Local 294 contended that it was thereby deprived of a substantial and material right and asked that the election be set aside . In his report the Re- gional Director found: The investigation reveals that at the joint conference of the parties held in Syracuse on March 12 , 1953 the Em- ployer refused to allow any of the participating labor organizations to check the eligibility list until 2 hours before the scheduled time of voting . On the morning of the election , that is, April 2, 1953 representatives of Local 294 appeared at the polling place and checked the eligi- bility list submitted by the Employer at that time. The representatives of Local 294 demanded that they be allowed to examine the original payroll of the Company, which was refused . The rights and duties of observers were carefully explained to all of the observers by the Board Agent in the presence of representatives of the parties. In particular, the right to challenne was fully explained. 2On April 13, 1953, Local 182, International Brotherhood of Teamsters , Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers , A F. of L ., filed objections to the election conducted among the employees in voting group 1. The Regional Director in his report on objections recom- mended that these objections be overruled as they were not timely filed. Local 182 did not except to the report. Accordingly, the objections of Local 182 are overruled 218 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD The Regional Director concluded that the objections filed by Local 294 were in the nature of post-election challenges, and he recommended that the Board overrule the objections and certify the Petitioner as the collective -bargaining representa- tive. In its exceptions , Local 294 , while not controverting the facts -found by the Regional Director , contends that the refusal of the Employer to permit a payroll check more than 2 hours in advance of the election was discriminatory and deprived the Union of a material right, necessitating that the election be set aside. Assuming that Local 294 was unable to determine precisely who the eligible voters were in the 2hours before the election, it was incumbent upon the Local , through its observer, to challenge any and all voters as to whose eligibility it had any doubts .' It is too late to raise the issue of eligibility now 4 We will accordingly overrule the exceptions. Our Decision and Direction of Elections herein providedthat the employees in voting groups ( 3) and (4) set forth therein would be taken to have indicated their desire to constitute a single unit if a majority in each group voted for the same labor organization . Inasmuch as a majority in each of these voting groups voted for the Petitioner , we find that a unit comprising the employees in voting groups ( 3) and (4) is appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act and will certify the Petitioner as the representative of the employees in that unit. [The Board certified Bonded Drivers and Mechanics Inde- pendent Union as the designated collective -bargaining repre- sentative of all truckdrivers and mechanics employed by the Employer at its Rennselaer terminal, excluding all other em- ployees, guards , and supervisors as defined in the Act.5] 3The number of voters actually challenged by any party was only seven, which was not sufficient to affect the results of the election. We find it unnecessary, therefore, to rule on the challenged ballots. 4N. L. R. B. v. A. J. Tower Co., 329 U. S. 324. 5 The Regional Director has already certified the Petitioner as the representative of the employees (a) in voting group 1, and (b) in voting group 5, and has certified the results of the election in voting group 2. NORTHERN CRATE & LUMBER COMPANY and LOCAL 12-15, INTERNATIONAL WOODWORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO and FRANK SUDER, RECEIVER FOR NORTHERN CRATE & LUMBER COMPANY.' Case No. 18-CA-325. June 1, 1953 DECISION AND ORDER On March 14, 1952, Trial Examiner George A. Downing issued his Intermediate Report in the above-entitled pro- t After the Intermediate Report was issued in this proceeding the Respondent was adjudged insolvent under the laws of the State of Wisconsin. Frank Suder, the duly appointed receiver, thereupon was permitted to intervene as a party respondent. 105 NLRB No. 22.