Pride Made Products, Inc.

DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Pride Made Products, Inc. and Highway & Local Motor Freight Drivers, Dockmen & Helpers, Local Union No. 701 a/w International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Help- ers of America, Petitioner. Case 22-RC-7166 November 3, 1977 DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVE BY CHAIRMAN FANNING AND MEMBERS PENELLO AND MURPHY Pursuant to authority granted it by the National Labor Relations Board under Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a three- member panel has considered objections to an election held July 1, 1977, t and the Regional Director's report recommending disposition of same. The Board has reviewed the record in light of the exceptions and brief, and hereby adopts the Regional Director's findings and recommendations.2 CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVE It is hereby certified that a majority of the valid ballots has been cast for Highway & Local Motor Freight Drivers, Dockmen & Helpers, Local Union No. 701 a/w International Brotherhood of Team- sters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, and that, pursuant to Section 9(a) of the Act, the foregoing labor organization is the exclusive representative of all the employees in the following appropriate unit for the purposes of collective-bar- gaining with respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of employment, or other terms and conditions of employment: All production and maintenance employees in- cluding warehouse employees, truckdrivers, fork- lift operators, and mechanics employed by the Employer at its 740 Lloyd Road, Matawan, New Jersey, location; excluding all office clerical employees, professional employees, guards and supervisors as defined in the Act. I The election was conducted pursuant to a Stipulation for Certification Upon Consent Election. The tally was: 15 for, and 10 against, the Petitioner: there were 3 challenged ballots, an insufficient number to affect the results. 2 We agree with the Regional Director's recommendation that Employ- er's Objection 2 be overruled. (The relevant portions of his report are attached hereto as an Appendix.) The investigation revealed that employee Green left the polling area with a marked ballot for a bnef period. Although she approached two to three other employees to inquire as to the location of the ballot box, Green neither showed her ballot to the employees nor told them how she had voted. Upon returning to the polling area to cast her ballot, the Board agent placed the ballot under challenge. The Board exercises great caution in reviewing the circumstances surrounding the election process. However, it does not set aside an election based on mere speculation that election standards have been impugned. There is no evidence herein that Green or any other employee participated in a dishonest voting scheme or that a Board document was misused for campaign propaganda purposes. Under these circumstances, we find that Green's conduct neither interfered with the election nor impaired the exercise of free choice by the employees participating therein. 233 NLRB No. 34 APPENDIX OBJECTION NO. 2 The Employer contends that an employee 3 left the polling area with her marked ballot and showed same to eligible voters and that this conduct warrants setting aside the election for "if" the ballot were marked in the "yes" box it would indicate that the National Labor Relations Board was endorsing the Petitioner. The investigation revealed that on the day of the election, Alberta Green the employee in question, entered the polling area, was given a ballot and entered the voting booth. She then left the booth with her ballot, left the polling area and walked over to a group of fellow employees who had already voted. She told these other employees that she thought the ballot was to be deposited in the voting booth, and had become confused when she could not find a recepticle for the ballot in the booth and had therefore placed the ballot in her purse and left the area. Ms. Green's fellow employees told her that the ballot box was adjacent to the booth not in it, and suggested that she return to the voting area and cast her vote. (Ms. Green did not show her ballot to the other employees, nor did she tell them how she had voted.) When she returned to cast her vote the Board agent challenged her ballot and it was placed in a challenge envelope. Her ballot is listed on the tally as a challenged ballot and has not been opened or counted. As there is no evidence that any eligible voter was shown Green's ballot the Employer's contention that a Board document had been altered and misused for campaign propaganda purposes is without merit. 4 In addition it is noted that the Employer does not allege, nor is there any evidence of "chain voting"5 or any other type of dishonest voting scheme. Accordingly, I find that Green's conduct of merely removing a ballot from the polling area does not warrant the setting aside of the election.6 On the basis of the foregoing, I find that the objection dealing with the conduct of Green and referred to herein as Objection No. 2 does not raise substantial and material issues with respect to the conduct of the election. Accordingly, it is recommended that it be overruled. 3 The Employer does not contend. nor is there any evidence that the employee involved is an agent of the Petitioner. I The several cases cited by the Employer involving the alteration of Board documents and dissemination of same were all deemed distinguish- able as there was no dissemination of the document in the instant case. 5 "By 'chain voting', a voter secrets a ballot upon his person without having placed it in the ballot box and takes it from the voting room to a place where it is marked by someone, who, in turn. gives the ballot to the second person in the chain who then goes into the polling room, picks up a blank ballot, goes to the polling booth, deposits the ballot marked outside the polling room and secretes the blank ballot on his person and by this means takes the blank ballot from the voting room. This is repeated again and again until all of those voters who take part in 'chain voting' have voted." Farrell-Cheek Steel Company, 115 NLRB 926, 927 note 3 (1956). 6 Farrell-Cheek Steel Company, supra, at 115 NLRB 927-928. 182