Bonded Freightways, Inc.

360 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD BONDED FREIGHTWAYS, INC. and BONDED DRIVERS AND MECHANICS INDEPENDENT UNION, Petitioner . Case No. 3-RC-1110. July 23, 1953 SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND ORDER As set forth in our Supplemental Decision and Certification of Representatives herein,' elections by secret ballots were conducted on April 2 and 3, 1953, under the direction of the Regional Director for the Third Region, among the employees in 5 voting groups. Local 182, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of America, AFL, appeared on the ballot in the election for voting group 1, only. A tally of ballots, showing that a majority of the votes in the election for voting group 1 was cast for the Petitioner, was furnished to the parties. On April 13, 1953, Local 182 filed objections to the election in voting group 1. On April 20, the Regional Director issued his report on objections, recommend- ing, inter alia, that the objections of Local 182 be overruled as untimely. 7-- As no exceptions had been filed to the report, the Board adopted this recommendation and overruled the objections of Local 182. Thereafter, Local 182 filed a motion to set aside supplemental decision and certification of representatives. 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 Houston, Styles, and Peterson]. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds: The motion of Local 182 alleges that a copy of the report on objections of the Regional Director was not served on Local 182 so that it did not have opportunity to file timely exceptions to such report and requests to have its exceptions considered at this time. As we have administratively determined that a copy of the report was not in fact servedupon Local 182, we will rescind our action adopting the Regional Director's recommendation that Local 182's objections to the election be overruled. Such action was predicated on the fact that no exceptions had been filed by Local 182 to the Regional Director's report within 10 days after the issuance of the report, as required by Section 102.61 (b) of the Board's Rules and Regulations (Series 6). However, as no copy of such report was served upon Local 182, it would be in- equitable to apply that rule to it in this case. We will, therefore, treat the instant motion as an exception to the Regional Director's report on objections and consider the is sue raised by the motion. The motion alleges that, at the time of the election and for 10 days thereafter, Local 182's attorney was absent from Utica, where the election was held, that the president of Local 182 was unaware of the Board's rule requiring the filing of objections 1105 NLRB 216. 2 The Regional Director had in the meantime certified the Petitioner as the representative of the employees in voting group 1. 106 NLRB No. 64. I BARTON DISTILLING COMPANY 361 within 5 days after the election and filed objections without the advice of counsel after the 5-day period had expired, and that, had his objections been timely filed, they would have been suffi- cient to cause the election to be set aside . Local 182 contends that for these reasons its objections shouldnotbe overruled as untimely. Section 102.61 of the Board's Rules and Regulations provides that objections to an election must be filed with the Regional Di- rection within 5 days after the tally of ballots has been furnished the parties. The Rules and Regulations of the Board, having been duly published in the Federal Register, are binding upon all par- ties to Board proceedings , regardless of actualnotice .3 Noade- quate reason has been shown for waiving in this case the time limit on filing objections to elections. As there is no dispute that the objections of Local 182 were filed more than 5 days after it was furnished with a tally of ballots, we find that such objections were untimely,4 and we will deny the instant motion, insofar as it seeks to have the Board consider such objections on their merits. [The Board denied the motion. ] 3Federal Register Act, 49 Stat 503, 44 USC § 301 et seq. at § 307. 4See William J. Dunn, d/b/a Dunn Motor Company, 100 NLRB 822. BARTON DISTILLING COMPANY, and BARTON WAREHOUSE AND DISTILLING CORPORATIONIand DISTILLERY, REC- TIFYING & WINE WORKERS' INTERNATIONAL UNION OF AMERICA, AFL, Petitioner. Case No. 9-RC-1958. July 23, 1953 DECISION AND ORDER Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before William G. Wilkerson, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. 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 [Members Houston, Styles, and Peter- son]. 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 organizations involved claim to represent certain employees of the Employer. 3. No question affecting commerce exists concerning the representation of employees of the Employer within the meaning 1 The name of the Employer appears as amended at the hearing. 1.06 NLRB No. 65.