G. K. Turner Associates

658 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD G. K. Turner Associates and International Associa- tion of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO, District Lodge No. 93. Case 20-CA-5766 June 19, 1970 DECISION AND ORDER BY MEMBERS FANNING, MCCULLOCH, AND BROWN Upon a charge filed by the International Associa- tion of Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO, District Lodge No. 93, herein called the Union, the General Counsel for the National Labor Relations Board, by the Regional Director for Region 20, issued a com- plaint dated October 20, 1969, against G. K. Turner Associates, herein called the Respondent, alleging that the Respondent was engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(a)(5) and (1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended. Copies of the charge, complaint, and notice of hearing were duly served on the Respondent. With respect to the unfair labor practices, the complaint alleges in substance that on February 25, 1969, a majority of the employees in a unit stipu- lated by the parties as appropriate, in a secret ballot election conducted under the supervision of the Re- gional Director for Region 20 of the National Labor Relations Board, designated and selected the Union as their representative for the purposes of collective bargaining, and on September 19, 1969, the Board certified the Union as the exclusive col- lective-bargaining representative of the employees in said unit.' The complaint further alleges that since on or about October 6, 1969, and at all times thereafter, the Respondent did refuse, and con- tinues to refuse, to bargain collectively with the Union as the exclusive collective-bargaining representative of its employees. On November 5, 1969, the Respondent filed its answer, admitting in part, and denying in part, the allegations of the complaint, presenting an affirmative defense, and requesting that the complaint be dismissed. On December 11, 1969, the General Counsel filed with the Board a Motion for Summary Judgment alleging that there were no factual issues which would warrant a hearing. Thereafter on December 12, 1969, the Board issued an Order Transferring the Proceeding to the Board and Notice To Show Cause. On January 5, 1970, the ' Decision and Certification of Representative issued September 19, 1969, in Cases 20-RC-8571 and 20-RM-1149 ( not published in NLRB volumes) Respondent filed its Answer to Notice To Show Cause. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the Na- tional Labor Relations Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three- member panel. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board makes the following: Rulings on the Motion for Summary Judgment In its Answer to Notice To Show Cause, the Respondent denies, in substance, that in the elec- tion held on February 25, 1969, an uncoerced or lawful majority selected the Union as the exclusive bargaining representative, and that the Board's cer- tification of the Union as the exclusive representa- tive of Respondent's employees was lawful, proper, or just. Respondent admits that since October 6, 1969, it has refused to meet and bargain with the Union, but denies that such refusal was not made in good faith. On February 25, 1969, pursuant to a Stipulation for Certification Upon Consent Election entered into by the parties hereto, an election was con- ducted under the direction of the Regional Director for Region 20. The tally of ballots showed that there were approximately 7 eligible voters and that 7 ballots were cast, of which 5 were for the Union and 2 were against the Union, with no challenged ballots. On March 3, 1969, the Respondent filed timely objections to conduct affecting the results of the election. After an investigation the Regional Director, on May 26, 1969, issued and served on the parties his Report on Objections in which he recommended that the Board overrule the objections in their en- tirety and issue an appropriate certification of representative. On June 13, 1969, the Respondent filed exceptions to the Regional Director's report requesting that the report be reversed, the election be set aside, and a new election directed. In the al- ternative, Respondent requested that the Board order the Regional Director to conduct a hearing. On September 19, 1969, the Board overruled the Respondent's exceptions and issued its Decision and Certification of Representative in which it cer- tified the Union as the exclusive bargaining representative of the employees in the appropriate unit. In its answer to the complaint the Respondent admits that beginning on or about September 23, 183 NLRB No. 81 G. K. TURNER ASSOCIATES 659 1969, and continuing to date, the Union has requested Respondent to bargain collectively with respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of employ- ment, and other terms and conditions of employ- ment, and. that commencing on or about October 6, 1969, Respondent has refused to bargain with the Union. In its defense, Respondent contends that the Board's decision and certification in this matter is contrary to law and fact, that the Board improperly overruled the Respondent's objections and excep- tions, improperly refused to grant Respondent a hearing on its objections and exceptions, and un- lawfully certified the Union as the representative of the Respondent's unit employees. Respondent does not contend that it has any newly discovered or previously unavailable evidence to present. Instead, it seeks to relitigate contentions made prior to and rejected in the Board's decision in Cases 20-RC-8571 and 10-RM-1149. Inasmuch as Respondent has already litigated such contentions, and the Board has con- sidered them, no issue has been raised which is properly triable in this proceeding.' As all material issues have been previously de- cided by the Board, or admitted by Respondent in its answer to the complaint, there are no matters requiring a hearing before the Trial Examiner. Ac- cordingly, the General Counsel's Motion for Sum- mary Judgment is granted. On the basis of the record before us, the Board makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 93, is a labor organization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act. III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES A. The Representation Proceeding 1. The unit The following employees constitute a unit ap- propriate for collective-bargaining purposes within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act: All production and maintenance employees in- cluding all shipping and receiving clerks of Respondent at its Palo Alto, California, loca- tion, excluding office clerical employees, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act. 2. The certification On February 25, 1969, a majority of the em- ployees of Respondent in said unit, in a secret bal- lot election conducted under the supervision of the Regional Director for Region 20, designated the Union as their representative for the purpose of collective bargaining with Respondent, and on Sep- tember 19, 1969, the Union was certified as the collective-bargaining representative of the em- ployees in said unit and continues to be such representative. B. The Request To Bargain and Respondent's Refusal 1. THE BUSINESS OF RESPONDENT Respondent is a California corporation engaged in the manufacture and nonretail sale of technical laboratory instruments, with a place of business of Palo Alto, California. Respondent, in the course and conduct of its business operations, annually purchases goods and services valued in excess of $50,000 directly from suppliers located outside the State of California. Respondent admits, and we find, that Respon- dent is, and has been at all times material herein, an employer engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATION INVOLVED International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers , AFL-CIO, District Lodge No. 'E-Z Davies Chevrolet , 161 NLRB 1380 Commencing on or about September 23, 1969, and continuing to date, the Union has requested and is requesting Respondent to bargain collective- ly with the Union as the exclusive collective-bar- gaining representative of the employees in the above-described unit. Since October 6, 1969, and continuing to date, Respondent has refused and continues to refuse to bargain collectively with the Union as the exclusive collective-bargaining representative of all employees in said unit. Accordingly, we find that the Union was duly certified by the Board as the collective-bargaining representative of the employees of the Respondent in the appropriate unit described above and that the Union at all times since September 19, 1969, has been and now is the exclusive bargaining representative of all the employees in the aforesaid unit, within the meaning of Section 9(a) of the Act. We further find that Respondent has since October 6, 1969, refused to bargain collectively with the 427-258 O-LT - 74 - 43 660 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Union as the exclusive bargaining representative of its employees in the appropriate unit. By such refusal Respondent has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Sec- tion 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act. IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE The acts of Respondent set forth in section III, above, occurring in connection with its operations as described in section I, above , have a close, inti- mate, and substantial relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States and tend to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and the free flow of commerce. V. THE REMEDY Having found that Respondent has engaged in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act, we shall order that it cease and desist therefrom and, upon request, bar- gain collectively with the Union as the exclusive representative of all employees in the appropriate unit and, if an understanding is reached, embody such understanding in a signed agreement. In order to insure that the employees in the ap- propriate unit will be accorded the services of their selected bargaining agent for the period provided by law, we shall construe the initial year of certifi- cation as beginning on the date the Respondent commences to bargain in good faith with the Union as the recognized bargaining representative in the appropriate unit. See Mar-Jac Poultry Company, Inc., 136 NLRB 785; Commerce Company d/b/a Lamar Hotel, 140 NLRB 226, 229, enfd. 328 F.2d 600 (C.A. 5), cert. denied 379 U.S. 817; and Bur- nett Construction Company, 149 NLRB 1421, enfd. 350 F.2d 57 (C.A. 10). CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. G. K. Turner Associates is an employer en- gaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. 2. International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO, District Lodge No. 93, is a labor organization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act. 3. The following unit is an appropriate unit for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act. All production and maintenance employees in- cluding all shipping and receiving clerks of Respondent at its Palo Alto, California, loca- tion, excluding office clerical employees, guards and supervisors as defined in the Act. 4. Since September 19, 1969, the Union has been the exclusive representative of all the em- ployees in the aforesaid appropriate unit for the purpose of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(a) of the Act. 5. By refusing on or about October 6, 1969, and at all times thereafter, to bargain collectively with the Union as the exclusive bargaining representa- tive of all the employees in the appropriate unit, Respondent has engaged in and is engaging in un- fair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(a)(5) of the Act. 6, By the aforesaid refusal to bargain , Respon- dent has interfered with, restrained, and coerced, and is interfering with, restraining, and coercing, employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed them in Section 7 of the Act, and has thereby en- gaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(a)( I) of the Act. 7. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. ORDER Pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that Respondent, G. K. Turner Associates, Palo Alto, California, its of- ficers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall: 1. Cease and desist from- (a) Refusing to bargain collectively concerning wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment with International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO, District Lodge No. 93, as the exclusive bargaining representative of its employees in the following ap- propriate unit: All production and maintenance employees in- cluding all shipping and receiving clerks of Respondent at its Palo Alto, California, loca- tion, excluding office clerical employees, guards and supervisors as defined in the Act. (b) In any like or related manner interfering with, restraining, or coercing employees in the ex- ercise of the rights guaranteed to them by Section 7 of the Act. 2. Take the following affirmative action which the Board finds will effectuate the policies of the Act: (a) Upon request, bargain with the above-named labor organization as the exclusive representative of all employees in the aforesaid appropriate unit with respect to rates of pay, wages, hours, and other G. K. TURNER ASSOCIATES terms and conditions of employment and, if an un- derstanding is reached, embody such understanding in a signed agreement. (b) Post at its place of business copies of the at- tached notice marked "Appendix."3 Copies of said notice, on forms provided by the Regional Director for Region 20, after being duly signed by Respon- dent's representative, shall be posted by the Respondent immediately upon receipt thereof, and be maintained by it for 60 consecutive days thereafter, in conspicuous places, including all places where notices to employees are customarily posted. Reasonable steps shall be taken by the Respondent to insure that said notices are not al- tered, defaced, or covered by any other material. (c) Notify the Regional Director for Region 20, in writing, within 10 days from the date of this Decision and Order, what steps have been taken to comply herewith. I In the event that the Board 's Order is enforced by a Judgment of a United States Court of Appeals, the words in the notice reading "Posted by Order of the National Labor Relations Board" shall be changed to read "Posted Pursuant to a Judgment of the United States Court of Appeals Enforcing an Order of the National Labor Relations Board " A PPEND!X NOTICE TO EMPLOYEES POSTED BY ORDER OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD An Agency of the United States Government WE WILL NOT refuse to bargain collectively with International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO, District Lodge No. 93 as the exclusive representative 661 of the employees in the bargaining unit described below. WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere with, restrain, or coerce our em- ployees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed them by Section 7 of the Act. WE WILL, upon request, bargain with the above-named Union as the exclusive represen- tative of all our employees in the bargaining unit described below with respect to rates of pay, wages, hours, and other terms and condi- tions of employment, and, if an understanding is reached, embody such understanding in a signed agreement. The bargaining unit is: All production and maintenance em- ployees including all shipping and receiv- ing clerks at our Palo Alto, California, lo- cation, excluding office clerical em- ployees, guards and supervisors as defined in the Act. Dated By G. K. TURNER ASSOCIATES (Employer) (Representative ) (Title) This is an official notice and must not be defaced by anyone. This notice must remain posted for 60 consecu- tive days from the date of posting and must not be altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. Any questions concerning this notice or com- pliance with its provisions may be directed to the Board's Office, 13050 Federal Building, 450 Gol- den Gate Avenue, Box 36047, San Francisco, California 94102, Telephone 415-556-3197.