Standard Oil Co.

656 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Standard Oil Company and International Union of Operating Engineers, AFL-CIO' and Local 725, International Union of Operating Engineers, AFL-CIO,2 Petitioners. Cases Nos. 18- RC-2412 and 18-RC-3169. May 6, 1960 SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND ORDER Following an election conducted pursuant to a Decision and Direc- tion of Election of the Board,' Operating Engineers was certified on May 6, 1955, in Case No. 18-RC-2412, as the collective-bargaining representative of a unit of operating and maintenance employees at the Employer's Mandan, North Dakota, plant. Following an elec- tion conducted pursuant to a stipulation for certification upon con- sent election, Local 725 was certified on May 23, 1957, in Case No. 18-RC-3169, as the collective-bargaining representative of a unit of office clerical employees at this same plant. Thereafter, under date of February 5, 1960, Independent Oil Workers Union Local No. 10, herein called Local 10, filed with the Board a motion to amend cer- tifications, and subsequently filed a supporting affidavit, requesting that the certifications issued in these cases be amended to show that the name of the bargaining representative had been changed to Independent Oil Workers Union Local No. 10. Neither the Employer nor Operating Engineers objects to the motion, and Operating Engi- neers has advised the Board that the charter of Local 725 has been revoked. In support of its motion, Local 10 alleges in substance that: (1) Since the certifications all bargaining with respect to both units has been carried on solely by officers of Local 725, who have executed all agreements resulting from such bargaining in the name of Local 725; (2) pursuant to a notice mailed on January 23, 1960, a meeting of Local 725 was held on January 27, 1960, for the purpose of voting on whether to disaffiliate from Operating Engineers, whether to change its name to Local 10, whether to transfer its assets, including its con- tracts with the Employer, to Local 10, and whether to affiliate with Independent Oil Workers; (3) 138 of the 181 members of Local 725 voted on these questions by secret ballot, the vote being 137 to 1 in favor of disaffiliating, changing the name, and transferring the assets, and 136 to 2 in favor of affiliating with Independent Oil Workers; (4) the former officers of Local 725 are now the officers of Local 10, which has been chartered by Independent Oil Workers ; and (5) since the meeting 178 of the 181 former members of Local 725 have i Herein called Operating Engineers The name of the Operating Engineers is amended in the caption to reflect the merger in 1955 of the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations. 2 Herein called Local 725. 8 Unpublished 127 NLRB No. 77. STANDARD OIL COMPANY 657 applied for membership in Local 10 and executed dues-deduction authorizations in its favor, revoking any such authorizations in favor of Local 725. It is clear from the foregoing that the allegations contained in Local 10's motion involve an alleged transfer of affiliation from the representatives which the employees have selected to a wholly differ- ent labor organization, having no ties to the selected representatives. Such allegations constitute an attempt to raise a question concerning representation which Local 10 requests that we resolve by amending the certifications. However, the Board has consistently held that the Act and Board policy require that such matters be determined through the filing of a petition and a secret-ballot election.4 The fact that the motion in this particular instance is unopposed does not in our opinion detract from the sound policy considerations underlying this requirement-that the Board should not lend its imprimatur to a transfer between unaffiliated labor organizations of the rights which flow from a Board certification unless the employees involved have expressed themselves in favor of such a transfer by secret ballot in an election conducted with the safeguards surrounding Board- conducted elections. In these circumstances, therefore, and in accord with well- established Board policy, we shall deny the motion. [The Board denied the motion.] CHAIRMAN LI] mox, dissenting: I must dissent from my colleagues' refusal to grant the motion in these cases. I cannot agree that, in the circumstances, the motion attempts to raise a question concerning representation; accordingly, the precedent on which they rely is inapposite. It is uncontroverted that the employees in the two units voted over- whelmingly to disaffiliate from Operating Engineers; to change the name of Local 725 to Local 10, and to affiliate with Independent Oil Workers. In addition, unlike the situation prevailing in the cases cited by the majortiy, the other interested parties have no objection to the motion. I cannot, therefore, agree that the allegations of the motion constitute an attempt to raise a question concerning representa- tion. The existence of a question concerning representation depends upon a doubt as to a claimed majority status or, at the very least, upon the desire of some party for an election to establish such ma- jority status. The question of affiliation or lack of affiliation of par- ticular unions has never been deemed relevant to that issue. Here, no party seeks an election or doubts Local 10's claimed majority status as a continuation of the existing representative. 4 Drennon Food Products Co, 120 NLRB 624, and cases cited therein 560940-61-vol. 127----43 658 , DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD I would, accordingly, on the basis of the uncontroverted allegations . concerning the employees' actions, and the absence of opposition, grant the motion in order to effectuate the policies of the Act to pro- mote orderly collective bargaining. MEMBER BEAN took no part in the consideration of the above Sup- plemental Decision and Order. Hardin's Bakeries, Incorporated and Retail, - Wholesale and Department Store ' Union, AFL-CIO. Case No. 15-CA-1510. May 9, 1960 DECISION AND ORDER On February 18, 1960, Trial Examiner C. W..Whittemore 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 thecopy of the Intermediate Report attached hereto. Thereafter, the Respondent. filed exceptions to the Intermediate Report and ,a supporting brief 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 Rodgers, Bean, and Fanning].; The Board has reviewed the -rulings made by the Trial Examiner at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the entire record in this case, including the Intermediate Report and the.-excep- tions, and hereby adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommenda- tions of the Trial Examiner, with the following modification.' ORDER Upon the entire record in this proceeding, and pursuant to Section 10 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the Respondent, Hardin's Bakeries, Incorporated, Meridian, Mississippi, its officers, agents, - successors, and assigns, shall : 1. Cease and desist from: (a) Discouraging membership in Retail, Wholesale and Depart- ment Store Union, AFL-CIO, or in any other labor organization, by 'Contrary to the Respondent's arguments , we have adopted the - Trial Examiner's credibility findings for we are not convinced by a clear preponderance ofall the relevant evidence that his credibility resolutions are incorrect. Ainsworth Precision Castings Company, Division of Harsco Corp., 125 NLRB 601. Although Member Rodgers agrees with this conclusion , he would not to !any degree rely,, as did the Trial Examiner , upon the small size of the Respondent's plant to establish the Respondent 's knowledge of the union activity of Gibson and Borden , the two discriminatees. For the finding of knowledge Member Rodgers would rely solely upon the credited testi- mony of Gibson and Berden as to threats made prior to discharge and statements made at the time of the discharges. 127 NLRB No. 76.