Sig Wold Storage & Transfer, Inc.

378 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Sig Wold Storage & Transfer, Inc. and Benjamin Laughlin, Petitioner and Local 959, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehouse- men and Helpers of America, Independent. Case 19- RD-603 August 8, 1973 DECISION ON REVIEW AND CERTIFICATION OF RESULTS BY MEMBERS JENKINS, KENNEDY, AND PENELLO Pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election issued by the Regional Director for Region 19, an election by secret ballot was conducted on December 21, 1972, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director among employees in the unit found appropriate. An official tally of ballots was served on the parties which showed that of approximately 14 eligible voters, 5 ballots were cast for and 8 against the Union. There was one challenged ballot which was insufficient to affect the results of the election. The Union, by telegram, filed objections to the conduct affecting the outcome of the election. Thereupon, the Regional Director conducted an investigation of the objections and on April 30, 1973, issued his Supple- mental Decision, Order, and Direction of Second Election in which he finds that the filing of the objec- tions was timely; sustains Objections 2 and 3; and sets aside the election conducted December 21, 1972, and directs that a second election be conducted. Thereaf- ter, in accordance with Section 102.67 of the National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations, Series 8, as amended, the Employer filed a timely request for review of the Regional Director's Supplemental Deci- sion alleging, inter alia, that the objections were un- timely filed. On May 29, 1973, the Board, by telegraphic order, granted the request for review with respect to the timeliness of the filing of objections, deferring ruling with respect to the merits of the objections I and stayed the second election pending decision on re- view. The Employer thereafter filed a brief on review. i In view of our finding herein that the objections were not timely filed, we find it unnecessary to consider that portion of the request for review dealing with the merits of the objections, as such matters are now moot 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. The Board has considered the entire record in this case with respect to the issue under review, including the Employer's brief on review and makes the follow- ing findings: It is not controverted that under the Board's Rules the last day on which timely objections could have been filed at the Board's Regional Office at Seattle, Washington, was January 2, 1973. On that day, at 3:16 p.m. (P.S.T.), the Union filed with the Western Union office at Fairbanks, Alaska, a telegram for transmission to the Seattle Regional Office, setting forth its objections to the election. This telegram was received at the Western Union Seattle office on the same day at 4:51 (P.S.T.), 9 minutes before the normal closing time of the Seattle Regional Office, but was not delivered to the Regional Office until January 3 at 1:49 p.m. (P.S.T.). In these circumstances, we find contrary to the Re- gional Director that the Union's telegraphic transmis- sion of its objections did not result in timely filing of objections as it was not received in the Regional Of- fice on January 2, nor could it reasonably have been expected to have been delivered on that date.2 As proper objections have not been timely filed in accordance with Section 102.69 of our Rules and as the tally of ballots shows that the Union has not re- ceived a majority of the valid ballots cast, we shall certify 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 Local 959, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehouse- men and Helpers of America, Independent, and that said labor organization is not the exclusive represent- ative of all the employees, in the unit herein involved, within the meaning of Section 9(a) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended. 2 See Hughes Tool Company, d/b/a KLAS-TV, 197 NLRB No 178, North- ern Natural Gas Company, 192 NLRB 549 (1971), Wilson-Sinclair Co, 191 NLRB 341 (1971) Cf Rio de Oro Uranium Mines, Inc, 119 NLRB 153, wherein the delay was not attributable to the objecting party as it could be reasonably assumed that its actions would have affected timely delivery 205 NLRB No. 70