Fulton Bag and Cotton Mills

370 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD APPENDIX A Engineering Assistants Employees engaged on the following training programs of the Employer Test Engineering Program Manufacturing Training Program Factory Training Program Planning Methods and Wage Rate and Time-Study Employees Tool Planners Tool Designers No. land No. 2. Machine Designer Tool Expediter ( outside and inside) Tool Engineers Trial and Test Employees Packing Methodsmen Laboratory Technicians Messengers Production Schedule Employees Inventory Control Employees Routing Clerk Rail Transportation Dispatcher Transportation Rate Clerk Freight Tracer Reservations Clerk Traffic Coordinator Safety Coordinator General Clerks to the Production, Maintenance, Inspection, and Shipping and Receiving Room Foremen FULTON BAG AND COTTON MILLS and PRINTING SPE- CIALTY AND PAPER PRODUCTS UNION NO. 388, INTER- NATIONAL PRINTING PRESSMEN AND ASSISTANTS' UNION OF NORTH AMERICA, AFL, Petitioner. Case No. 21-RC-2898. July 23, 1953 SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF RESULTS OF ELECTION On March 6, 1953, pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election' issued by the Board, an election by secret ballot was conducted in the above-entitled matter under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Twenty-first Region in the unit found to be appropriate. Upon the completion of the election, a tally of ballots was issued and duly served upon the parties. The tally shows that of approximately 87 eligible voters, 72 cast valid ballots, of which 23 were for the Petitioner and 49 were against the Petitioner. 1 Not reported in printed volumes of Board decisions. 106 NLRB No. 59. FULTON BAG AND COTTON MILLS 371 On March 13, 1953, the Petitioner filed timely objections to the election, alleging, inter alia, that the Employer made a speech to the employees in the plant after working hours the day before the election which contained threats of reprisal if the Petitioner won the election, and that the Employer, on March 3, ordered Petitioner' s representatives who were dis- tributing handbills, from the Company's parking lot, making certain statements that were heard by employees who were working nearby, which conduct was calculated to prevent a free choice by the employees as to whether they desired the Petitioner as their bargaining representative. Thereupon, in accordance with the Rules and Regulations of the Board, the Regional Director conducted an investigation and issued and duly served upon the parties a report on objections. In his report, the Regional Director found that 3 of the 5 objections made by the Petitioner were without merit; he made no finding or recommendation on the objection relative to the exclusion of union representatives from the parking lot and he recommended that the election be set aside on the basis of the Employer's speech the day before the election. The Petitioner filed no exceptions to the Regional Director's report; the Employer excepted to his recommendation that the election be set aside. The Board has considered the Petitioner's objections, the Regional Director's report, and the Employer's exceptions to the Regional Director's report, and finds merit in the Em- ployer's exceptions. The Regional Director's report shows that the speech which he concludes warrants setting aside the election, occurred in the following circumstances. On the afternoon of March 5, 1953, the day before the election, during working hours supervisors notified all employees that the plant manager wanted to meet with them in the front end of the plant at 4:30 p. m. closing time. When all the employees were assembled they were told that their attendance at the meeting was voluntary and they were addressed by the plant manager. Two or three of the employees left during the meeting. The working hours of the employees ended at 4:30 and no one received pay for the time spent in attendance at the meeting. The election was held the following day from 3:30 to 4:30 p. m. The Petitioner made no request before or after the speech to address the employees. The speech of March 5 contained no threats or promises of benefit and was privileged under Section 8 (c),but the Regional Director concluded that because of its timing it interfered with the election. We do not agree. The Board has held that where an employer times a speech on company time and property so as to preclude the possibility of a union's requesting and receiving a similar opportunity to speak to employees, this conduct is tantamount to a refusal to consider a request to reply and interferes with employees' freedom of choice of bargaining representative by preventing them from hearing both sides of 322615 0 - 54 - 25 372 DECISIONS OF, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD the question under comparable circumstances ..' The facts of this case , however, do not warrant a finding that the Employer preempted the last opportunity for discussion and made im- possible the presentation of the Petitioner ' s views under circumstances approximating equality . We think that here there was sufficient time between the speech and the election for the Petitioner to request a similar opportunity to present its views to the employees . As no request was made by the Petitioner , we find that the Employer has not interfered with the election of March 6, 1953. Having sustained the Employer ' s exceptions to the finding of the Regional Director upon which he based his recommendation that the election be set aside , we find that the Petitioner's objections do not raise substantial and material issues with respect to the, conduct of the election . Accordingly , the objec- tions are hereby overruled , and we shall issue a certification of results of election based on the tally of ballots. [The Board certified that a majority of the valid ballots was not cast for Printing Specialty and Paper Products Union No. 388, International Printing Pressmen and Assistants ' Union of North America, AFL, and that the said labor organization is not the exclusive representative of the employees in the unit heretofore found appropriate.] Chairman Farmer and Member Peterson took no part in the consideration of the above Supplemental Decision and Certifi- cation of Results of Election. 2 Hill Brothers Company, 100 NLRB 964; Foreman & Clark, Inc., 101 NLRB 40. ROBERTS BROTHERS and RETAIL CLERKS INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AFL, LOCAL 201. Case No . 36-CA-347. July 24, 1953 DECISION AND ORDER Upon the charge duly filed on December 8, 1952 , by Retail Clerks International Association , AFL, Local 201, herein called the Union, the General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the General Counsel, by the Regional Director for the Nineteenth Region issueda complaint dated February 26, 1953, against Roberts Brothers , herein called the Respondent , alleging that the Respondent interfered with, restrained , and coerced and is interfering with, restrain- ing, and coercing its employees in the exercise of their rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act, and thereby engaged in and is engaging in an unfair labor practice within the meaning of 106 NLRB No. 74.