Great Falls Employers Council, Inc.

370 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD authority to recommend wage increases. The Employer asks that a hearing be held to-resolve the issues raised by its exceptions. The Board has considered the Regional Director's report and the Employer's exceptions thereto and finds that they raise substantial and material issues of fact with respect to the eligibility of Burger, Collins, Martels, Lagos, Raymond, and Tewksbury, which may best be resolved by a hearing. However, we shall order that such a hearing be held only if it should develop, after the opening of the ballots here- inafter directed to be opened and counted, that the remaining six challenged ballots may be determinative of the results of the election. [The Board directed that the Regional Director for the First Region shall, within ten (10) days from the date of this Direction, open and count the ballots of Maurice Eastabrook, Ezra Snow, Arnold Taylor, and James Heaney, and serve upon the parties a supplemental tally of ballots.] ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, if upon the opening and counting of the four ballots above described, the challenged ballots of Joseph Burger, Peter Collins, Conrad Martels, Peter Lagos, Edward Raymond, and Francis Tewksbury are still sufficient in number to affect the results of the election, the Regional Director shall hold a hearing for the purpose of determining the eligibility of these employees. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the hearing officer designated for the purpose of conducting such hearing, shall prepare and cause to be served upon the parties a report containing resolutions of credibility of witnesses, findings of fact, and recommendations to the Board as to the disposition of the challenges. Within 10 days from the date. of the issuance of such report, any party may file with the Board in Wash- ington, D. C., an original and six copies of exceptions. The party filing the same shall serve a copy thereof upon each of the other parties, and the Regional Director. If no exceptions are filed thereto, the Board will adopt the recommendations of the hearing officer. Great Falls Employers Council, Inc. and Ronald Mauer, Peti- tioner and Retail Clerks International Association, Local No. 57. Case No. 19-RD-88. October 12, 1955 DECISION AND ORDER Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act,- a hearing was held before Albert L. Gese, hearing offi- 114 NLRB No. 78. GREAT FALLS EMPLOYERS COUNCIL, INC. 371 der. - The hearing officer's rulings- made ,at the hearing,ar-e free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.' 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 Petitioner, an employee of the Employer, asserts that the Union is no longer the representative, as defined in Section 9 (a) of the Act, of the employees designated in the petition. The Union is a labor organization currently recognized by the Em- ployer as the exclusive bargaining representative of the employees designated in the petition. 3. No question affecting commerce exists concerning the represen- tation of the employees of the Employer within the meaning of Sec- tion 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act for the follow- ing reasons : The Petitioner requests that a decertification election be held for a professional group of pharmacists employed by certain member com- panies of the Employer. The Union contends that the petition should be dismissed. The Employer agrees with the Petitioner that the phar- macists have the right to a decertification election. The Union has, for a number of years, contractually represented the pharmacists of the Employer's member-companies within a larger multiemployer bargaining unit of clerical employees. In a decision issued a short time ago,2 the Board stated, "Recently, however, the Board has reexamined the issue of the appropriate unit in decertifica- tion proceedings and has come to, the conclusion that in decertification elections, the existing bargaining unit alone, is the appropriate unit. We, therefore, find that the overall unit heretofore certified and bar- gained for by the parties, is here appropriate." The rule propounded was applied in that case to a group of technical employees and had been previously applied to a group of craft employees.' We are con- vinced the principle that the only appropriate unit for decertification is the one coextensive with the existing bargaining unit is equally ap- plicable to groups of professional employees'. Accordingly, we shall dismiss the petition.' [The Board dismissed the petition.] 3 The Union objected, at the hearing, to the hearing officer's action permitting amend- ment of the petition. We find, however, that the hearing officer's ruling was within his discretionary control of the hearing and was not prejudicial. 2 Standard Oil Company of Cahfornsa (Richmond Refinery, Richmond, California), 113 NLRB 475 3 Campbell Soup Company, 111 NLRB 234. 4In light of this determination, we do not pass upon other grounds advanced by the Union which allegedly require dismissal of the petition. 387644-56-vol. 114-25