Qualiton

QUALITON 65 As no complaint has been issued, and the charges have been dis- missed, we must find that the employees participating in the strike are economic strikers.' They are therefore ineligible to vote as it appears on the basis of the present record that they have been permanently re- placed and that vacancies in their job do not exist. [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.] * Times Square Stores Corporation, 79 NLRB 361. Qualiton and Bookbinders & Bindery Women Union Local No. 63, Petitioner. Case No. 21-RC-4089. January 13, 1956 DECISION, ORDER, AND DIRECTION OF SECOND ELECTION Pursuant to a stipulation for certification upon consent election exe- cuted August 22, 1955, an election by secret ballot was conducted on August 26, 1955, under the direction and supervision of the Acting Regional Director for the Twenty-first Region of the National Labor Relations Board among the employees in the unit herein found ap" propriate. Following the election the parties were furnished a tally of ballots. The tally shows that of the approximately 14 eligible voters, 14 cast ballots, of which 3 were for the Petitioner, 10 were against the Petitioner, and 1 ballot was challenged. The challenged ballot is not sufficient to affect the results of the election. On September 2, 1955, the Petitioner filed timely objections to con- duct affecting the results of the election, a copy of which was served on the Employer. In accordance with the Rules and Regulations of the Board, the Regional Director conducted an investigation of the objections and, on October 27,1955, issued and served on the parties his report on objections in which- he found that the objections did not raise substantial or material issues to conduct affecting the results of .the election and recommended that the objections be overruled. On November 21,1955, the Petitioner filed timely exceptions to the Acting Regional Director's report and requested that the election be set aside. Upon the basis of the entire record in this case, the Board finds the following : 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain em -ployes 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. 115 NLRB No. 16. 390609-56-vol. 115-6 66 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 4. The following employees of the Employer constitute a unit ap- propriate for purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act: All journeymen bookbinders, binderywomen, specialty workers, novelty workers, desk pad, office and stationery ac- cessory workers, apprentices, stockmen and/or shipping clerks at the Employer's plant in Los Angeles, California, excluding all other em- ployees, professional employees, guards, watchmen, and supervisors as defined in the Act. Objections In its objections, the Petitioner contended, inter alia, that before the election the employees were called into the office of the plant owner, two at a time, for interviews with the Employer, and that such conduct on the part of the Employer affected the results of the election in a manner adverse to the Petitioner. In his report, the Acting Regional Director found that during the period from August 19, 1955, to August 24, 1955, all but two of the eligible voters were called into the office of Morris Piltzer, the plant owner, and were addressed by Mrs. Selvin, the Employer's labor rela- tions consultant, in the presence of Piltzer. It appears that Selvin spoke to the employees in 3 groups of 2 employees each and in 2 groups of 3 employees each. During these talks, Selvin discussed the issues raised by the forthcoming election, and told the employees that in the opinion of the Employer an outside agency would not be a factor contributing to harmonious relationships between the Employer and the employees. The meetings with each group of employees lasted approximately 25 minutes. The Acting Regional Director concluded that as the employees were not called into the Employer's office individually, and as the Em- ployer's remarks were noncoercive in tenor, the Petitioner's objection to such conduct was without merit, and he recommended that it be overruled.' The Petitioner takes exception to the Acting Regional Director's conclusion and recommendation, and contends that the con- duct of the Employer, as found by the Acting Regional Director, was such as to interfere with the employees' freedom of choice in the selection of a bargaining representative. We agree with the Peti- tioner. The Board has held that the technique of calling employees, in- dividually or in small groups, into an employer's office prior to an elec- tion and urging that they reject the union, is in itself conduct which interferes with a free choice by the employees in the selection of a 1 The Acting Regional Director further found that other objections of the Petitioner were also without merit, and recommended that they, too, be overruled. The Petitioner did not file exceptions to these findings and recommendations . In view of our determina- tion herein , we find it unnecessary to consider the remaining objections filed by the Peti- tioner or the Acting Regional Director's findings thereon. SPECIAL WIRE GOODS, INC. 67 bargaining representative and warrants setting aside the election.2 This is so, regardless of the noncoercive tenor of the Employer's actual remarks. Accordingly, we find, contrary to the Acting Regional Director, that the meetings conducted by Selvin and Piltzer interfered with the em- ployees' freedom of choice in the election. We shall order that the. election be set aside and direct that a new election be held. [The Board set aside the election held on August 26,1955.] [Text of Direction of Second Election omitted from publication.] s Economic Machinery Company, 111 NLRB 947; Oregon Frozen Foods Company, Etc., 113 NLRB 881 ; Richards Container Corporation, 114 NLRB 1435. Special Wire Goods, Inc. and United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO. Case No. 1-CA-1913. January 16,1956 DECISION AND ORDER On October 10, 1955, Trial Examiner Thomas N. Kessel issued his Intermediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor practices and recommending that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the copy of the Intermediate Report attached hereto. Thereafter, the Respondent filed exceptions to the Intermediate Report. The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner made at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed. The Board has considered the Intermediate Report, the exceptions, and the entire record in the case, and hereby adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Trial Examiner. ORDER Upon the entire record in this case, and pursuant to Section 10 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that -the Respondent, Special Wire Goods, Inc., Worcester, Massachusetts, its officers, agents, suc- cessors, and assigns, shall : 1. Cease and desist from : (a) Discouraging membership in the United Steelworkers of Amer- ica, AFL-CIO, or any other labor organization of its employees, by terminating the employment of any of its employees discriminatorily and by thereafter failing and refusing to reinstate them, or by dis- criminating in any other manner in regard to their hire and tenure of employment or any term or condition of employment. 115 NLRB No. 15.