California Cedar Products Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 27, 1952

99 N.L.R.B. 341 (N.L.R.B. 1952)

CALIFORNIA CEDAR PRODUCTS COMPANY 341
cordingly, that nonregular employees who were first employed by the
Employer more than 1 year prior to the eligibility date established
hereinafter are eligible to vote in the elections
As the Employer's pickery operations are seasonal, and as it ap-
pears that the current season is now over, we shall, in accord with
usual Board practice, and in order to make the franchise available
to the largest number of eligible voters, direct that the election be
held during the Employer's next season, when a representative comple-
ment of nonregular employees is employed, on a date to be determined
by the Regional Director, among the employees in the appropriate
unit who are employed during the payroll period immediately preced-
ing the date of the issuance by the Regional Director of the notice of
election.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this
volume.]
Y See The Welch Grape Juice Company, supra.
CALIFORNIA CEDAR PRODUCTS COMPANY and WAREHOUSE UNION LOCAL
6, INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN 'S AND WAREHOUSEMEN 'S UNION,
PETITIONER . Case No. ?O-RC-1669. May 27,195,0
Supplemental Decision and Certification of Representatives
On March 14, 1952, pursuant to the Board's Decision and Direction
of Election herein, dated February 26, 1952,1 an election by secret
ballot was conducted under the direction and supervision of the
Regional Director for the Twentieth Region, among the employees
of the Employer in the unit found appropriate in the Decision. Upon
completion of the election, a tally of ballots was duly furnished the
parties. The tally showed that of 140 votes cast, 35 were for the
Petitioner, 95 were for the Intervenor,2 4 were against participating
labor organizations, and 6 were challenged.
On March 18, 1952, the Petitioner filed objections to conduct affect-
ing the results of the election. In accordance with the Rules and
Regulations of the Board, the Regional Director conducted an investi-
gation of the objections, and on April 18, 1952, issued and served upon
the parties his report on objections. In his report, the Regional Di-
rector found that the objections did not raise substantial and material
issues with respect to the election and recommended that they be over-
ruled. Thereafter, the Petitioner timely filed exceptions to the
Regional Director's report.
' Not reported in printed volumes of Board decisions.
2 Pencil Material Workers' Union No. 20298, AFL.
99 NLRB No. 56.
215233-53-23
342 DECISIONS ' OF NATIONAL LABOR- RELATIONS BOARD
-Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor
Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with
this case to a three-member panel [Members Houston, Styles, and
Peterson].
The Petitioner objected to the election essentially on the ground
that the Employer, on or•about the day of the election, discriminatorily
discharged or laid off four employees known by the Employer and
employees to be active adherents of the Petitioner. The Regional
Director found that the four employees in question, who held the
'least seniority in their department, were informed on the day before
the election that they would be laid off at the end of the next working
day because of lack of work; that they were so laid off, after voting in
the election without challenge; that there was a bona fide lack of
work;. and that the layoffs were consonant with the Employer's bar-
gaining agreement with the Intervenor, and the Employer's past
practice. He further found that no unfair labor practice charges had
been filed and no evidence was submitted to show that the Employer
acted in a discriminatory manner, or in any other way interfered with
the election. He accordingly recommended that the objections be
overruled: I
In its exceptions, the Petitioner contends that : (1) The Regional
Director erred in his finding that the discharges were not discrimi-
natory and requests a hearing to present proof thereof; and (2), even
if the discharges were not discriminatory, they were so timed and of
such a nature as to interfere with the election. We find no merit in
these contentions.
As to (1), without passing upon whether or not the evidence in• the
-case would sustain a finding that the layoffs violated Section 8 (a) (3)
,of the Act and in view of the fact that no unfair labor practice charges
have been filed, we agree with the Regional Director that this content
tion raises no substantial and material issues with respect to the elec-
-tion.3 Moreover, the Petitioner does not cite, in support of its con-
tention that the discharges or layoffs were discriminatory, any spe-
cific controlling evidence which it could adduce and which the Re-
gional Director failed to consider.'
As to (2), an Employer is obviously not precluded from effecting
nondiscriminatory discharges or layoffs because of the pendency of an
election.
We find, therefore, that the Petitioner's objections raise no substan-
tial and material issues with respect to the election and we adopt the
Regional Director's recommendation that the objections be overruled.
8 Radio Corporation of America (Victor Division), 90 NLRB 1989, 1994.
4 Cf. Southern Wood Preserving Company, 89 NLRB 1243. While the Petitioner asserts
in its exceptions that the four employees have been restored to their jobs, such circumstance
would not demonstrate that their layoffs were discriminatory.
VALENCIA SERVICE COMPANY 343
As we have overruled the Petitioner's objections and as it appears
from the tally of ballots that the Intervenor has secured a majority of
the valid votes cast in the election, we shall certify the Intervenor as
the collective bargaining representative of the employees in the ap-
propriate unit.
Certification of Representatives
IT is HEREBY CERTIFIED that Pencil Material Workers' Union No.
20298, AFL, has been designated and selected by a majority of the
employees of the Employer in the unit found appropriate in the De-
cision and Direction of Election herein, as their representative for the
purposes of collective bargaining, and that, pursuant to Section 9 (a)
of the Act, the said organization is the exclusive representative of all
the employees in such unit for the purposes of collective bargaining
with respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of employment, and other
conditions of employment.
VALENCIA SERVICE COMPANY and UNIDAD GENERAL DE TRABAJADORES
i 'PuERTO Rico, PETITIONER . Case No. 24-RC-252. May 27,1952
Supplemental Decision and Certification of Representatives
On February 9,1952, pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Elec-
tion issued herein on January 10, 1952,1 an election by secret ballot
was conducted under the direction and supervision of the Regional
Director for the Twenty-fourth Region among the employees of the
Employer, in the unit found appropriate in the Decision. Thereafter,
,the parties were furnished with a tally of ballots, which shows that of
approximately 16 eligible voters, 5 cast ballots, of which 3 were for
and 2 against the Petitioner.
On February 13, 1952, the Employer filed objections to the conduct
of the election and requested that the election be set aside. There-
after, on April 15, 1952, the Regional Director, pursuant to the
'Board's Rules and Regulations, issued and duly served on the parties a
report on objections, in which he found the objections to be without
merit and recommended that the Petitioner be certified as the exclu-
`3ive bargaining representative of the employees in the appropriate
unit. The Employer timely filed exceptions to the Regional Direc-
tor's report.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board
has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member
panel. [Members Houston, Styles, and Peterson].
i Not reported in printed volumes of Board decisions.
99 NLRB No. 57.