Three Oaks, Inc.

534 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Three Oaks, Inc. and Local No. 4, of the Service Employees' International Union, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case 13-RC-11792 September 19, 1969 DECISION AND DIRECTION BY CHAIRMAN MCCULLOCH AND MEMBERS BROWN AND ZAGORIA Pursuant to a stipulation for certification upon consent election, an election by secret ballot was conducted on May 15, 1969, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for Region 13. At the conclusion of the balloting, the parties were furnished with a tally of ballots which showed that, of approximately 62 eligible voters, 54 cast valid ballots, of which 20 were for the Petitioner, 21 were against the Petitioner, and 13 were challenged. The 13 challenged ballots were sufficient in number to affect the results of the election. Thereafter, the Petitioner and Employer 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 Acting Regional Director conducted an investigation and, on July 17, 1969, issued and served upon the parties his report on challenges and objections, in which he recommended that eight challenges be overruled and five sustained; that the Employer's objections be overruled in their entirety and that Petitioner's objections be overruled except for additional matters, fully noted below, covering an alleged grant of benefit and coercive meeting, which he relied upon in finding that the Employer engaged in improper conduct affecting the outcome of the election. He further recommended that in the event the opening and counting of the determinative challenged ballots do not result in the Petitioner receiving a majority of the valid votes cast, that the election be set aside and a second election directed on the basis of the Employer's conduct. The Employer thereafter filed timely exceptions to the recommendation that the election be set aside contending that the Board should overrule the Acting Regional Director's action in setting aside the election, certify the results thereof or direct a hearing to resolve questions of fact raised with respect to the granting of benefits and the allegedly coercive meeting. 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. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds: 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain employees of the Employer. 3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representation of certain employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9(c)(1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. 4. We find, in accord with the stipulation of the parties, that the following employees constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining: All maintenance employees, housekeeping employees, laundry employees, kitchen employees, nurse's aids, and waivered LPN's but excluding LPN's, registered nurses, clerical employees, professional employees, guards and supervisors as defined in the Act. 5. The Board has considered the Acting Regional Director's report on challenges and objections, the Employer's exceptions thereto and brief, and hereby adopts the Regional Director's report as modified herein. As heretofore indicated, the Acting Regional Director concluded that the Employer interfered with the election by (a) revising its system of computing salaries during the critical period, thereby granting a preelection benefit to employees and (b) conducting a meeting at the locus of managerial authority at which employees were urged to vote against union representation. As to (a), the facts show that prior to the events here in issue employee earnings were computed on a monthly basis, with monthly earnings then halved and paid on the 5th and 20th of each month. Under this system, the wages received by employees on each pay day were the same even though actual earnings in each semi-monthly period would be expected to vary depending upon the amount of time worked during the governing pay period. Certain employees apparently could not understand why the wage payments were not reflective of the variant hours worked in the corresponding pay periods. To eliminate this confusion, the wage computation system was revised so that salaries were computed on a daily, rather than monthly basis, enabling each wage payment to correspond with the actual time worked in the related pay period. This adjustment did not result in any economic benefit to the employees. and it does not appear that the change, made I month before the election, was intended to influence the outcome of the election In the circumstances, and contrary to the Acting Regional Director, we find that the revision in the wage computation system did not result in a benefit to employees sufficiently substantial to warrant a conclusion that it was related to, or furnished grounds for setting aside, the election. Accordingly, we overrule the Acting Regional Director's recommendations based upon this incident. As to (b) it appears that about 2 days before the election, the 7 or 8 night shift nurses aids were called to a meeting in the nursing director's office. 178 NLRB No 87 THREE OAKS, INC. The meeting was addressed by the Employer's Executive Director, who appealed for a no-vote in noncoercive terms. The Acting Regional Director concluded that this meeting interferred with the laboratory atmosphere necessary for an election since it was conducted at the locus of managerial authority and attended by a small group of employees. However, it appears that this office is the regular place of work of the admissions nurse and has been used for training sessions. In the circumstances, we find that this incident does not justify setting aside the election under the General Shoe doctrine.' Accordingly, we overrule the Regional Director's recommendations based upon this mcidctit. As all objections to the validity of the election have been ovcrruled,2 we shall remand this proceeding to the Regional Director for Region 13, with direction that the determinative overruled challenged ballots be opened and counted, that the parties be furnished a revised tally, and that he issue an appropriate certification, in accordance with the National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations, Series 8. as amended. 535 DIRECTION The case is hereby remanded to the Regional Director. It is hereby directed that. as part of his investigation to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining with the Employer, the Regional Director for Region 13 shall, within 10 days from the date of this Decision, open and count the challenged ballots of George Gibbs, Carl Howard, Beverly Sherd, Jean Rutherford, Leotis Dillard, Georgia Courtney, Grace Wells, and Sylvia Kalman, and shall thereafter prepare and cause to be served upon the parties a revised tally of ballots, including therein the count of said ballots. In the event that the revised tally of ballots shows that the results are determinative, the Regional Director shall issue the appropriate certification. 'General Shoe Corporation . 97 NLRB 499 'In the absence of exceptions thereto, we adopt pro forma, the Acting Regional Director's recommendations that Petitioner's remaining objections be overruled ; that the Employer's objections be overruled in their entirety , that the challenges to the ballots of George Gibbs, Carl Howard, Beverly Sherd, Jean Rutherford, Leotis Dillard. Georgia Courtney, Grace Wells, and Sylvia Kalman, be overruled, and that the challenges to the ballots of Nellie Simons, Bernice Bullock. Patricia Brooks. Monica Brown, and Kathleen Clarke be sustained