Greensboro Coca Cola Bottling Co.

84 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Director will issue a certification of representatives for such group which the Board finds under the circumstances constitutes an appro- priate unit. [Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication.] Greensboro Coca Cola Bottling Company and International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, Local 391,1 Petitioner. Case No. 11-BC- 1042. March 11, 1958 SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND DIRECTION Pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election issued by the Board on December 5, 1957,2 an election by secret ballot was con- ducted on December 18, 1957, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Eleventh Region of the National Labor Relations Board among the employees in the unit found appropriate by the Board. At the close of the election, the parties were furnished with a tally of ballots which shows that of approximately 30 eligible voters, 30 ballots were cast, of which 14 were cast for the Petitioner, 11 against the Petitioner, and 5 were challenged. As the challenged ballots were sufficient in number to affect the results of the election, the Regional Director investigated the eligibility of those individuals whose ballots were challenged. Thereafter, on January 23, 1958, the Regional Director issued a report on challenges in which he recom- mended that the challenges to the ballots cast by Raymond C. Chandler, Billy Janey, and Jerry Hartsell be overruled, and that the challenges to the ballots of Wilbert James and Lloyd Cox be sus- tained. The Employer thereafter filed timely exceptions to the Regional Director's report. No exceptions were filed by the Peti- tioner. 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 [Chairman Leedom and Members Bean and Fanning]. In its exceptions the Employer contends that prior to the election the Petitioner examined and approved a list of employees eligible to vote. It contends that this approval is final and binding upon the parties insofar as the voting eligibility of employees is concerned and urges the Board, in making its determination of whether or not to overrule the challenges to the ballots of employees James and Cox, to give great weight to the fact that their names appeared on the 1 The Board having been notified by the AFL-CIO that it deems the Teamsters' certifi- cate of affiliation revoked by convention action, the identification of the Petitioner is hereby amended. 2 Unpublished 120 NLRB No. 11. GREENSBORO COCA COLA BOTTLING COMPANY 85 eligibility list approved by the Petitioner. We agree with the Regional Director that the failure of the Petitioner to question the eligibility of James and Cox at the time it approved the eligibility list did not preclude it from challenging their ballots at the time of the election. The primary purpose of preparing and checking an eligi- bility list is to provide a guide to facilitate the election procedure and it is not usually regarded as an agreement to preclude the challenging, at the election, of any voter whose name appears on, or is omitted from, such list.3 We therefore find that the Petitioner was within its rights in challenging the ballots of employees James and Cox. The Employer also excepts to the Regional Director's finding that the challenges to the ballots of James and Cox should be sustained. It contends that these employees are drivers properly for inclusion in the unit of route salesmen and drivers, and special salesmen, and that therefore the challenges to their ballots should be overruled. James and Cox are under the supervision of the sales manager but they do not sell any of the Employer's products. They do make occasional deliveries of the Employer's products but this is done only in cases of emergency. James and Cox are classified by the Employer as cooler and vending machine servicemen. They deliver, install, maintain, and repair vending machines which dispense the Employer's products. They perform such functions both in the Employer's plant and on the customers' premises. Although they do drive a truck, it is for the purpose of picking up and delivering vending machines which is inci- dental to their primary duties. We find, therefore, that James and Cox are not in the unit and therefore ineligible to vote. Accordingly, we shall, as recommended by the Regional Director, sustain the challenges to their ballots. The Employer also took exception to the alleged failure of the Regional Director to make fuller, more specific, and conclusive find- ings of fact relating to issues involving the challenges to the ballots of employees Chandler, Janey, and Hartsell. However, neither the Employer nor the Petitioner excepted to the Regional Director's rec- ommendations that these challenges be overruled. Under such cir- cumstances, we shall adopt the Regional Director's recommendations and overrule the challenges to the ballots of Chandler, Janey, and Hartsell. As the ballots to which challenges have been made and overruled are sufficient in number to affect the results of the election, we shall direct that they be opened and counted with the other ballots. [The Board directed that the Regional Director for the Eleventh Region shall, within ten (10) days from the date of this Direction, open and count these ballots and serve upon the parties a supplemental tally of ballots.] a See Norris-Thermador Corporation, 119 NLRB 1301; 118 NLRB 1341; 0. E. Hzekeiy and Associates, Inc., 117 NLRB 42.