L. Gordon & Son, Inc.

438 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 5. Load crew : There are five high school students who work about 21/2 hours a day, 5 days a week, loading the trucks. Both the Peti- tioner and the Teamsters would include them among the employees voting. The Employer takes no position. As the members of the loading crew are regular part-time employees, we find that they have a sufficient interest to be eligible to votes [Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication in this volume.] P Cutter Laboratories, 98 NLRB 533. L. GORDON & SON, INC. and INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF PULP, SULPHITE AND PAPER MILL WORKERS , AFL, PETITIONER. Case No. 6-RC-1058. July 31,1952 Supplemental Decision and Certification of Representatives Pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election issued by the Board on May 20, 1952.1 an election by secret ballot was held on June 6, 1952, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Fifth Region, among the employees of the Employer in the units found appropriate in the Decision. At the close of the election, the parties were furnished with tallies of ballots showing that in the L. Gordon & Son, Inc., unit of approximately 93 eligible voters, 93 cast ballots, of which 70 were for the Petitioner, 20 were against the Petitioner, and 3 were challenged; and in the Stylecraft Division of L. Gordon & Sons, Inc., unit of approximately 19 eligible voters, 19 cast ballots, of which 7 were for the Petitioner, 5 were against the Petitioner, and 7 were challenged. On June 12, 1952, the Employer filed objections to conduct affecting the results of the election. In accordance with the Rules and Regu- lations of the Board, the Regional Director investigated the challenged ballots and the objections. On June 26, 1952, the Regional Director issued,and served upon the parties his report on objections and chal- lenges in which he recommended that the challenges be sustained,2 that the objections be overruled and that the Petitioner be certified. There- after, the Employer filed timely exceptions to the Regional Director's report and to his recommendation that the objections be overruled. i Not reported in printed volumes of Board decisions. 2 The parties agreed, subsequent to the election , that the challenges to the ballots in the Stylecraft unit, which were sufficient to affect the results of the election , should be sustained on the ground that the voters challenged were permanently laid off by the Employer Accordingly, the Regional Director recommended sustaining the challenges to these ballots and no exceptions were filed to this recommendation. 100 NLRB No. 71. L. GORDON & SON, INC.- 439 As a basis for its objections, the Employer alleged that a sample ballot distributed on the day of the election by "organizers and adherents of the Petitioners" was "misleading on its face and, there- fore, improper." As stated in the Employer's objections, the ballot distributed by the Petitioner consisted of single sheets of paper re- producing the ballot appearing in the notice of election, was marked "sample" in several places, and contained an X in the "Yes" box denoting support of Petitioner. The Regional Director's recommendation that the objection be overruled was based upon his finding that the "sample ballot" com- plained of did not bear the name and title of the Board's Regional Director," and that "it could not reasonably have given the impres- sion that the Board was officially taking sides in the election." In its exceptions to the Regional Director's report, the Employer argues that the rationale of the decided cases 3 "was not limited solely to the impropriety of the use of the Regional Director's name and title on a marked facsimile ballot, but also contemplated the question of total similarity to the official sample ballot." The Employer fur- ther argues that, under current Board practice, the Regional Di- rector's name and title do not appear on the sample ballot included in the notice of election and, therefore, that the ballot distributed by the Petitioner is identical to the Board's current sample ballot except for the mark in the "Yes" box. We do not agree with the Employer's contentions and, upon the basis of the entire record, we find that the sample ballot as reproduced and distributed by the Petitioner 4 did not suggest to the voters that the Board supported or endorsed the Petitioner. We believe that the ballot distributed by the Petitioner clearly indicated that it was a "sample" and was thus in the nature of mere campaign propaganda which did not intimidate, coerce, or mislead the eligible employees in exercising their free choice in the election. Accordingly, we adopt the Regional Director's recommendations and overrule the Employer's objections to the election. As the tallies of ballots show that the Petitioner has secured a majority of the valid votes cast, we shall certify it as the exclusive bargaining representative in the units heretofore found appropriate. 8 Citing Sears Roebuck & Co., 47 NLRB 291 ; Gate City Table Co., Inc., 87 NLRB 1121, and Am-0-Krome Company, 92 NLRB 893. 4 The Employer excepted to the failure of the Regional Director to make a finding of fact with respect to the Employer's objection that the sample ballot was separately dis- tributed . We find no merit in this exception. The Employer stated in its objections that "organizers and adherents of the Petitioner distributed to and circulated among employees" the sample ballot. Circulation of campaign literature in this fashion , whether or not attached to or contained in other material, is not misleading or improper. . 440 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Certification of Representatives IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that International Brotherhood of Pulp, Sulphite and Paper Mill Workers, AFL, has been selected by a ma- jority of the employees in Unit 1 and Unit 2 below, as their repre- sentative for the purposes of collective bargaining and that, pur- suant to Section 9 (a) of the Act, the said organization is the ex- clusive representative of all such employees for the purposes of col- lective bargaining with respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of em- ployment, and other conditions of employment. Unit 1: All production and maintenance employees at the Balti- more, Maryland, plant of L. Gordon & Son, Inc., excluding office cleri- cal and sales employees, truck drivers, and all supervisors. Unit 2: All production and maintenance employees at the Balti- more, Maryland, plant of Stylecraft Division of L. Gordon & Son, Inc., including assistant foreladies, but excluding office clerical and sales employees, the forelady, and all other supervisors. CHAIRMAN HERZOG took no part in the consideration of the above Supplemental Decision and Certification of Representatives. CHARLES N. INGRAM AND MARY C. INGRAM, D/B/A CHARLES INGRAM LUMBER COMPANY and INTERNATIONAL WOODWORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER. Case No. 10-RC-1858. August 1,19& 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 John S. Patton, hearing offi- cer. 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 Peterson]. 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. 3. 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. 4. The appropriate unit : 100 NLRB No. 78.