Georgia-Pacific Corp.

240 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Georgia-Pacific Corporation and International Broth- erhood of United Papermakers & Paperworkers, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case 30-RC-1703 September 22, 1972 DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF RESULTS OF ELECTION BY MEMBERS JENKINS, KENNEDY, AND PENELLO Pursuant to a Stipulation for Certification Upon Consent Election executed by the parties on March 28, 1972, and approved by the Regional Director for Region 30 of the National Labor Relations Board on March 29, 1972, an election by secret ballot was con- ducted on April 7, 1972, under his direction and su- pervision among the employees in the stipulated unit. At the conclusion of the election, the parties were furnished with a tally of ballots which showed that of approximately 51 eligible voters 51 cast ballots, of which 23 were for and 28 against the Petitioner. There were no challenged ballots. Thereafter, Petitioner filed timely objections to conduct affecting the results of the elections. In accordance with the National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations, Series 8, as amended, the Acting Regional Director conducted an investiga- tion and, on April 28, 1972, issued and duly served upon the parties his report on objections and notice of hearing, in which he ordered a hearing to be held before a Hearing Officer designated by the Acting Regional Director to resolve the substantial and mate- rial factual issues raised by Petitioner's objections. The Acting Regional Director further ordered that the Hearing Officer designated for the purpose of con- ducting the hearing prepare and cause to be served upon the parties a report containing resolutions of the credibility of witnesses, findings of fact, and rec- ommendations to the Board as to the disposition of said issues. Pursuant to said order a hearing was held on May 26, 1972, at Sheboygan, Wisconsin, before Amedeo Greco, Hearing Officer. All parties were represented by counsel, participated fully in the hearing, and were given full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to produce evidence bearing on the issues. On June 23, the Hearing Officer issued and served upon the parties his report on objec- tions, in which he recommended that Petitioner's ob- jections be sustained. 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 Na- tional Labor Relations Board has delegated its au- thority in this proceeding 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 purposes of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein. 2. The labor organization involved claims to rep- resent certain employees of the Employer. 3. A question affecting commerce exists concern- ing the representation of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Sections 9(c)(1) and 2(6) and (7) of the Act. 4. The parties stipulated, and we find, that the following employees of the Employer 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 em- ployed by the Employer at its Sheboygan, Wis- consin, plant; but excluding all office clerical employees, professional employees, guards and supervisors as defined in the Act. 5. The Board has considered the objection, the Hearing Officer's Report, and the Employer's excep- tions and brief. Petitioner's objections allege that the Employer, through its personnel representative, Swanson, mis- represented crucial facts to voters by depicting Peti- tioner as corrupt and autocratic. A meeting was held in the plant 26 hours prior to the election on the Employer's own time. During the course of a speech Swanson, a former member of Petitioner's hierarchy, asserted that Petitioner was un- democratic and told the employees that Petitioner re- moved him, as well as other officials, for his dissenting view on the union's secrecy rule, which prohibited reports to the local union membership concerning col- lective-bargaining negotiations. Swanson stated that Al Brown, another union officer, was removed from Petitioner's International staff for his antiadministra- tion views. The Hearing Officer found a serious misrepre- sentation in Swanson's failure to disclose to the em- ployees that he had been removed by Petitioner for actually violating the secrecy rule, rather than for merely opposing the rule, thus making it appear to the employees that Petitioner did not tolerate mere dis- sent. This misstatement, in the context of misrepre- senting the cause of Brown's retirement from the un- ion, i.e., Brown voluntarily retired because of factors other than disagreement with union policies, led the Hearing Officer to conclude Swanson tried to paint a picture of union which was "not completely accurate. " The Hearing Officer found these misstatements suf- ficient to warrent the setting aside of the election. We disagree. The Board has long held that exaggerations, in- accuracies, half-truths, name calling, and minor mis- 199 NLRB No. 43 GEORGIA-PACIFIC CORPORATION 241 statements, while not condoned, will not be grounds for setting aside an election.' In the course of a sharp- ly contested campaign some parties have, in their zeal, resorted to propaganda which attacks the character of another party .2 However, it is well settled that the Board does not ordinarily pass judgment on such campaign statements and sets aside elections only if coercion, fraud, or campaign trickery is shown? No such showing is made here. We therefore find that Swanson's statements, even if falling short of com- plete honesty, do not constitute misrepresentations 1 Hollywood Ceramics Company, Inc., 140 NLRB 221, 224, Gummed Prod- ucts Co., 112 NLRB 1092. 2 The record clearly discloses that Swanson 's speech was designed to rebut a union handbill circulating on the plant premises which claimed Petitioner was "THE WORLD'S MOST DEMOCRATIC UNION " 7 E.g., Calcor Corporation, 106 NLRB 539, 541-542; Higgins, Inc, 106 NLRB 845, 846, fn. 2. which would impair a free choice in the election, and we overrule the objections. Accordingly, as the Petitioner did not receive a majority of the votes cast, we shall certifiy the results of the election. CERTIFICATION OF RESULTS OF ELECTION It is hereby certified that a majority of the valid ballots have not been cast for the International Broth- erhood of United Papermakers and Paperworkers, AFL-CIO, and that said labor organization is not the exclusive representative of all the employees, in the unit herein involved, within the meaning of Section 9(a) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended.