American Hoist and Derrick Co.

INDUSTRIAL BROWNHOIST DIV. OF AMERICAN HOIST Industrial Brownhoist Division of American Hoist and Derrick Company and United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case 7-RC-9672' July 20, 1970 DECISION, ORDER, AND DIRECTION OF SECOND ELECTION BY MEMBERS FANNING , MCCULLOCH, AND JENKINS Pursuant to a Stipulation for Certification Upon Consent Election approved on November 24, 1969, an election by secret ballot was conducted on December 11, 1969, under the direction and super- vision of the Regional Director for Region 7, among the employees in the stipulated unit. At the conclusion of the election, the parties were furnished a tally of ballots which showed that there were approximately 16 eligible voters and that 16 ballots were cast, of which 4 were for the Union and 12 against. There were no challenged ballots. Thereafter, the Petitioner filed objections to con- duct affecting the results of the election. In accordance with the National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations and Statements of Procedure, Series 8, as amended, the Regional Director conducted an investigation and, on December 29, 1969, issued and duly served on the parties his Report on Objections, in which he directed that a hearing be held to resolve the issues raised by the objections. He further ordered that the Hearing Officer designated to conduct the hear- ing prepare and cause to be served on the parties a report containing resolutions of the credibility of witnesses, findings of fact, and recommendations to the Board as to the disposition of said issues. Pursuant to the Regional Director's order, a hearing was held on January 29,1970, before Hear- ing Officer Raymond A. Shemke. All parties par- ticipated and were given full opportunity to ex- amine and cross-examine witnesses and to in- troduce evidence bearing on the issues. On March 31, 1970, the Hearing Office issued and duly served on the parties his Report and Recommendations on ' At the hearing, Petitioner withdrew Objection 2 and all of Objection 3, except the first sentence thereof charging that the Employer had sent coer- cive letters to its employees ' The Board agrees with the Hearing Officer that the general wage in- creases, which were initially announced to unit employees individually by Charles Ego on November 9,1969, and which were thereafter implemented during the critical preelection period, interfered with the election herein We find it unnecessary to, and do not, pass on his further recommendation that we find that election interference also resulted from the employer's an- nouncement and implementation , during the critical periosd , of extensive improvements in its fringe benefits program 551 Objections in which he recommended that Objec- tion 1 be sustained in its entirety and Objection 4 be sustained in part, and that Objection 3, to the extent that it had not been previously withdrawn, be overruled.' He therefore recommended that the election conducted herein on December 11, 1969, be set aside, and that a new election be ordered. The Employer filed timely exceptions to the report and a brief in support thereof. 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 case to a three-member panel. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds: 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act, and it will effectuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein. 2. Petitioner is a labor organization claiming to represent certain employees of the Employer. 3. A question affecting commerce exists con- cerning the representation of employees of the Em- ployer within the meaning of Section 9(c)(1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. 4. The parties stipulated, and we find, that the following employees constitute a unit appropriate for collective bargaining within the meaning of Sec- tion 9(b) of the Act: All product expeditiors, chief controlmen, con- trolmen (assembly), and controlmen (machine and fabrication) employees employed by the Employer at its Bay City, Michigan, plant, but excluding all production and maintenance em- ployees, office and shop clerical and profes- sional employees, guards and supervisors as defined in the Act. 5. The Board has reviewed the rulings made by the Hearing Officer at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the Hearing Officer's report, the exceptions and brief, and the entire record in the case, and hereby adopts the findings and recommendations of the Hearing Officer except as modified herein.' Unlike the new fringe benefits program, the evidence does not establish that the salary increases were given at any other of the Employer's plants beside the one in which the election was conducted The record further establishes that, for at least a 20-month period prior to November 9, the Employer had never given a general salary increase, but rather had given ir- regular individual increases The record also shows that, contrary to past practice, the Employer announced the November increases by the method of individual interviews conducted by the plant manager In these circum- stances, we conclude that the evidence supports a finding that the salary in- creases were conceived and timed to interfere with the election 184 NLRB No. 62 552 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD ORDER It is hereby ordered that the election conducted herein on December 11, 1969, be , and it hereby is, In order to assure that all eligible voters may have the opportunity to be informed of the issues in the exercise of their statutory right to vote, all parties to the election should have access to a list of voters and their ad- dresses which may be used to communicate with them Excelsior Un- derwear Inc , 156 NLRB 1236, N L R B v Wyman -Gordon Co, 394 U S 759 Accordingly , it is hereby directed that an election eligibility list, con- taining the names and addresses of all the eligible voters, must be filed by set aside. [Direction of Second Election3 omitted from publication. ] the Employer with the Regional Director for Region 7 within 7 days after the date of issuance of the Notice of Second Election by the Regional Director The Regional Director shall make the list available to all parties to the election No extension of time to file this list shall be granted by the Regional Director except in extraordinary circumstances Failure to comply with this requirement shall be grounds for setting aside the election whenever proper objections are filed