Minerals and Metals Corp.

710 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD constitute a single and complete department in any real sense. In- stead, they are but a part of 2 of the Employer's 4 operating depart- ments, albeit the only departments having employees in the city divi- sion. On the basis of the foregoing we find that a unit limited to field operating employees in the city division is inappropriate. We shall therefore dismiss the petition. [The Board dismissed the petition.] MINERALS AND METALS CORPORATION and INTERNATIONAL CHEMICAL WORKERS UNION, A. F. OF L. Case No. 11-RC-604. November 2, 1954 Supplemental Decision and Certification of Representatives Pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election 1 issued by the Board on April 29, 1954, as amended on May 26 and June 22, 1954, an election by secret ballot was conducted on July 23, 1954, under the supervision of the Regional Director for the Eleventh Region among the employees in the appropriate unit at the Employer' s operations in Murphy, North Carolina. At the close of the election, the parties were furnished with a tally of ballots, which showed that, of approxi- mately 12 eligible voters, 7 voted for, and 3 against, the Petitioner and 19 ballots were challenged. The number of challenged ballots was sufficient to affect the results of the election. The Employer filed timely objections to conduct of the Petitioner allegedly affecting the results of the election. In accordance with the Board's Rules and Regulations, the Regional Director conducted an investigation and, on September 3, 1954, duly served upon the parties his report on challenges and objections, in which he recommended that the Employer's objections be overruled. The Employer filed timely exceptions to this recommendation.2 In its objections, the Employer alleged that the Petitioner had in- terfered with the election by causing 19 former employees of the Em- ployer to vote, the Petitioner knowing that they were ineligible. The Regional Director found that the 19 were in fact ineligible, princi- pally because they were not on the Employer's payroll on the eligibil- ity date. He found further that the Petitioner had urged former employees of the Employer to vote but that there was no disorder at the polls or evidence of threats. He accordingly recommended that the objections be overruled. 1 Not reported in printed volumes of Board Decisions and Orders. 2 With respect to the challenges, the Regional Director recommended that all 19 chal- lenges be sustained. As no exception was taken to this recommendation, we hereby adopt it. 110 NLRB No. 107. HARTMAN BROTHERS 711 In its exceptions, the Employer contends that, by causing 19 known ineligibles to appear at the polls and "stand in line during the entire voting period" and submit to challenges and interrogation in the pres- ence of other voters, the Petitioner coerced such other voters. While we do not condone the action of the Petitioner, if, as alleged, it caused persons to vote who were known by it to be ineligible, we do not believe that the mere fact that a disproportionate number of in- eligible persons voted under challenge in the presence of other voters warrants the inference that such other voters were thereby coerced to vote for the Petitioner. Accordingly, we find, in agreement with the Regional Director, that the Employer's exceptions raise no substan- tial or material issues with respect to conduct affecting the results of the election, and we therefore overrule them. Because the tally of ballots shows that the Petitioner received a majority of the valid votes cast, we shall certify the Petitioner as the bargaining representative of the employees in the appropriate unit. [The Board certified International Chemical Workers Union, A. F. of L., as the designated collective-bargaining representative of the employees in the unit found appropriate in the Decision and Direc- tion of Election herein.] HARTMAN BROTHERS and INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, LOCAL No. 955, AFL CARRINGTON CHEVROLET COMPANY and INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, LOCAL No. 955, AFL DOZIER MOTORS, INC.' and INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHIN- ISTS, LOCAL No. 955, AFL GILBERT MOTOR COMPANY and INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MA- CHINISTS, LOCAL No. 955, AFL. Cases Nos. 30-CA-340, 30-CA-346, 30-CA-347, and 30-CA-348. November 1", 1954 Decision and Order On March 10, 1954, Trial Examiner Howard Myers issued his Inter- mediate Report in the above-entitled proceedings, finding that the Re- spondent had not engaged in the unfair labor practices alleged in the complaint, and recommending that the complaint be dismissed in its entirety. Thereafter, the General Counsel filed exceptions to the Intermediate Report and a supporting brief. The Board has considered the issue of jurisdiction raised herein and finds, in agreement with the contentions of the Respondents, that it 1 The name of this Respondent was corrected at the hearing as indicated. 110 NLRB No. 111.