Drives, Inc.

526 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Drives, Incorporated and District No. 102, International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO. Cases 38-CA-255 and 38-CA-305 November 7, 1969 SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND ORDER BY MEMBERS BROWN, JENKINS, AND ZAGORIA On July 3, 1968, the National Labor Relations Board issued its Decision and Order (172 NLRB No. 101) in the above-entitled proceeding, adopting with modifications, the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Trial Examiner. In that Decision, the Board found that Respondent violated Section 8(a)(1), (2), (3), and (5) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, and entered a bargaining order in favor of the Union. Subsequent to the issuance of the Board's Decision, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in N.L R.B. v. Gissel Packing Company, 395 U.S. 575, in which the Court laid down certain guidelines relative to the propriety of finding violations of Section 8(a)(5) and the issuance of bargaining orders for remedying such violations. In view of the Supreme Court decision, the Board, acting on its own motion, decided to reexamine the Decision and Order herein. Accordingly, on August 11, 1969, the Board notified all the nartles that it was reconsidering the 8(a)(5) finding and the bargaining order issued in these cases and advised the parties that they could submit statements of position with respect to such issues. Thereafter, the General Counsel filed a Statement of Position. 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 these cases to a three-member panel. The Board having reexamined the Decision and Order herein, as well as the entire record including the General Counsel's Statement of Position, adheres to the original Decision and Order herein. We agree with the Trial Examiner that Respondent's refusal to recognize the Union violated Section 8(a)(5), and that an order to bargain is appropriate. In doing so, we find that Respondent's extensive unfair labor practices so diminished the possibility of ensuring a fair election that employee free choice is more effectively ascertained by the use of signed authorization cards than by an election. Further, in the circumstances of this case, where Respondent's unfair labor practices are of such pervasive character, an order to bargain would be an essential part of any remedial order, even absent an 8(a)(5) violation. ORDER Pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that Respondent, Drives, Incorporated, Fulton, Illinois, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall take the action set forth in the original Decision and Order herein. 179 NLRB No. 88