Perlin Packing Co., Inc.

PERLIN PACKING COMPANY APPENDIX 633 NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES Pursuant to the Recommended Order of a Trial Examiner of the National Labor Relations Board, and in order to effectuate the policies of the National Labor Rela- tions Act, as amended, we hereby notify our employees that: WE WILL bargain, upon request, with United Furniture Workers of America, AFL-CIO, Local 282, as the exclusive bargaining representative of our employ- ees in the appropriate bargaining unit with respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of employment, and other terms and conditions of employment and we will embody any understanding reached in a signed agreement . The appro- priate bargaining unit is: All production and maintenance employees , shipping and receiving clerks, and truckdrivers employed at the Employer' s Memphis, Tennessee, plant, excluding office clericals, guards, watchmen, and supervisors as defined in the Act. HERRON YARN MILLS, INC., Employer. Dated------------------- By------------------------------------------- (Representative ) (Title) This notice must remain posted for 60 consecutive days from the date of posting, and must not be altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. If employees have any question concerning this notice or compliance with its pro- visions, they may communicate directly with the Board 's Regional Office, 746 Fed- eral Office Building, 167 North Main Street, Memphis, Tennessee 38103, Telephone 534-3161. Perlin Packing Company, Inc. and Local Union No. 822, affiliated with International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America ; Local Union No. 305, affiliated with Amalgamated Meat Cutters and Butcher Work- men of North America, AFL-CIO, Petitioners. Case 5-RO- 533/. August 03, 1966 DECISION AND DIRECTION Pill-scant to a Stipuliti lull I'm' Certi(ieat ion [Tpnn Consent I Electron approved on October 18, 1965, a secret-ballot election was conducted under the supervision of the Regional Director for Region 5 on November 10 and 11, 1965 A tally- of the ballots showed that of approximately 85 eligible voters, 39 cast ballots for, and 39 against, the Petitioners, 1 cast a challenged ballot, and 1 cast a void ballot. The challenged ballot was sufficient to affect the results of the elec- tion. Thereafter, the Petitioners filed timely objections to conduct affecting the results of the election. In accordance with the National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations, Series 8, as amended, the Regional Director conducted an investigation of the challenge and the objections, and on Janu- ary 21, 1966, issued and duly served on the parties his report on 160 NLRB No. 49. 634 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD challenge and objections. He recommended that the objections be overruled and the challenge be resolved by a hearing. No exceptions were filed to the Regional Director's report, and the Board on Feb- ruary 7, 1966, issued its Order Directing Hearing in which it over- ruled the objections and directed the Hearing Officer to receive tes- timony to resolve the issue raised by the challenge to the ballot of Elmer Chesson, Jr., and to issue a report containing resolutions as to the credibility of the witnesses, findings of fact, and recommenda- tions to the Board as to disposition of said challenge. Accordingly, upon due notice a hearing was held before Hearing Officer Louis Aronin on March 10 and 11, 1966, in Norfolk, Virginia. All parties were afforded a full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the challenged ballot. The Hearing Officer's rulings were free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. On June 13, 1966, the Hearing Officer issued his report on chal- lenged ballot in which he recommended that the challenge be over- ruled. The Employer filed timely exceptions to the Hearing Officer's report. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this proceeding to a three-member panel [Chairman McCulloch and Members Brown and Zagoria]. The Board has considered the entire record in this case 1 and makes the following findings. 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act, and it will effectuate the purposes of the Act to assert juris- diction herein. 2. The Petitioners are labor organizations claiming to represent certain employees of the Employer. 3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa- tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Sections 9(c) (1) and 2(6) and (7) of the Act. 4. The following employees, as stipulated by the parties, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act : All production and maintenance employees including truckdrivers and helpers and clean-up employees employed at the Employer's plant located at 435 Indian River Road, Norfolk, Virginia, excluding office clerical employees, professional employees, guards, and super- visors as defined in the Act. i The Employer' s request for oral argument is denied, as the record and exceptions adequately present the issues and the positions of the parties WAUSAU STEEL CORPORATION 635 5. The Board has considered the entire record in this case, includ- ing the Hearing Officer's report and the Employer's exceptions thereto and finds that the Employer's exceptions raise no substantial or material issues of fact or law warranting reversal of the Hearing Officer's findings and recommendation.2 Accordingly, we shall overrule the challange and direct that the Regional Director open and count the challenged ballot of Elmer Chesson, Jr., and prepare and serve on the parties a revised tally of ballots and the appropriate certificate. [The Board directed that the Regional Director for Region 5 shall, within 10 days from the date of this Direction, open and count the ballot of Elmer Chesson, Jr., and serve on the parties a revised tally of ballots and an appropriate certificate.] 8 We adopt the Hearing Officer's finding that Elmer Chesson, Jr , was temporaiily laid oft with a reasonable expectation of recall in the foreseeable future as of the eligibility date and the date of the election, and his recommendation that the challenge to his ballot therefore be overruled. Although we do not adopt the Hearing Officer's statement of opinion that "such recall would halve occurred within the foreseeable future were it not for the fact that the challenge to his ballot became determinative of the election results,' this does not affect the Hearing Officer 's ultimate findings and recommendation nor our adoption thereof. No unfair labor practice charges have been filed. Wausau Steel Corporation and Shopmen's Local Union #811, In- ternational Association of Bridge, Structural and Ornamental Iron Workers (AFL-CIO). Cases 30-RC-858 and 30-CA-314. August 19, 1966 DECISION AND ORDER On May 18, 1966, Trial Examiner Frederick U. Reel issued his Decision in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the Respond- ent had engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor prac- tices and recommending that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the attached Trial Exam- iner's Decision. Thereafter, the Respondent filed exceptions and a supporting brief, and the General Counsel filed a brief in support of the Trial Examiner's Decision. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Members Fanning, Brown, and Zagoria]. The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner made at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed. 160 NLRB No. 47.