Morristown Foam and Fibre Corp.

52 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Morristown Foam and Fibre Corp. and United Textile Workers of America, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case 10-RC-9797 May 31, 1974 DECISION AND ORDER DIRECTING HEARING BY CHAIRMAN MILLER AND MEMBERS FANNING AND PENELLO Pursuant to a Stipulation for Certification Upon Consent Election executed by the parties and approved by the Regional Director, an election by secret ballot was conducted on December 7, 1973, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for Region 10, among the employees in the stipulated unit. At the conclusion of the election, the parties were furnished a tally of ballots, of which 85 were for, and 96 against, the Petitioner. There were no challenges. Thereafter, the Petitioner 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 Regional Director conducted an investigation and, on January 28, 1974, issued and duly served on the parties his report on objections in which he recommended, inter alia, that the Board sustain Objection 2 and direct a new election, and that in the event the Board disagreed with that recommenda- tion, a hearing be directed to resolve credibility issues relating to Objection 3. Thereafter, the Employer filed timely exceptions to the Regional Director's report, and a supporting brief. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations Board has delegated its authority 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 purpose of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein. 2. The Petitioner is a labor organization claiming to represent certain employees of the Employer. 3. A question affecting commerce exists concern- ing the representation of the employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9(c)(1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. 4. The parties stipulated, and we find, that the following employees constitute a unit appropriate for ' In the absence of exceptions , we adopt, pro forma, the Regional Director's approval of Petitioner's requests that Objections I and 4 be withdrawn. As noted, the Regional Director recommended that a hearing be directed to resolve credibility issues relating to Objection 3 pertaining to the the purpose 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 Morristown, Tennessee, plant but excluding all office clerical employees, professional employees, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act. 5. The Board has considered the Regional Direc- tor's report, the Employer's exceptions thereto, and supporting brief, and finds merit in Respondent's exceptions pertaining to Objection 2. Accordingly, the Board adopts the Regional Director's findings and recommendations only to the extent consistent herewith.' The Petitioner's Objection 2 contended that the Employer's 12 letters, leaflets, and handouts distrib- uted to employees during the critical period prior to the election contained factual misinterpretations which coerced the employees and interfered with their free choice in the election. The Regional Director found that the Employer's literature made continued reference to violence, disaster, threats to kill, loss of jobs, plant closure, and long, costly strikes, and that such a constantly recurring theme created an atmosphere of fear and a belief among the employees of the inevitability of strikes and loss of jobs and ultimately plant closure if they selected the Petitioner as their bargaining representative, thereby preventing them from exercising a free and untram- meled choice in the election. Contrary to the Regional Director, we do not find that the literature distributed by the Employer exceeds the permissible limits of electioneering propoganda or that the employees were not capable of evaluating the literature as electioneering propo- ganda. Accordingly, we would not find the employ- ees were prevented from exercising a free and untrammeled choice in the election. Therefore, we overrule the objection. Allied/Egry Business Systems, Inc., 169 NLRB 514; Louis-Allis Company, 182 NLRB 433. 6. Inasmuch as we have decided to adopt the Regional Director's recommendation that a hearing be held to resolve credibility issues relating to Objection 3, the Board makes the following: ORDER It is hereby ordered that a hearing be held before a duly designated Hearing Officer for the purpose of Employer's alleged alteration of the Board's official sample ballots. In our view the Employer's exceptions raise no material or substantial issues of law which would warrant reversal of the Regional Director's recommendation as to this objection. 211 NLRB No. 6 MORRISTOWN FOAM AND FIBRE CORP. receiving evidence to resolve the issues raised by Petitioner's Objection 3. 'it Is" FURT1 ER-TJRFbERED that the Hearing Officer designated for the purpose of conducting the hearing shall prepare and cause to be served upon the parties a report containing resolutions of the credibility of witnesses, findings of facts, and recommendations to the Board, as to the disposition of the said objection. Within the time prescribed by the Board's Rules and Regulations, either party may file with the Board in Washington, D.C., eight copies of exceptions thereto. 53 Immediately upon the filing of such exceptions, the party filing same shall serve a copy thereof on the other party and shall file a copy with the Regional Director. If no exceptions are filed thereto, the Board will adopt the recommendation of the Hearing Officer. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the above-entitled case be, and it hereby is, remanded to the Regional Director for Region 10 for the purpose of arranging such hearing, and that the said Regional Director be, and hereby is, authorized to issue notice thereof