Denton Sleeping Garment Mills, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 16, 1951

93 N.L.R.B. 329 (N.L.R.B. 1951)

DENTON SLEEPING GARMENT MILLS , INC. 329'
DENTON SLEEPING GARMENT MILLS, INC. and INTERNATIONAL
LADIES' GARMENT WORKERS UNION, AFL, PETITIONER . Case No..
7-RC-1061. February 16, 1951
Supplemental Decision and Order
On October 30, 1950, pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Elec--
tion issued by the Board herein, an election by secret ballot was com-
ducted under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director
for the Seventh Region among the employees in the unit found ap-
propriate in the Board's decision. Upon completion of the election,,
a tally of ballots was furnished the parties. The tally shows that of
approximately 119 eligible voters, 106 cast valid ballots, of which 46.
were for, and 60 against, the Petitioner.
On November 1, 1950, the Petitioner filed objections to conduct af-
fecting the results of the election, alleging that the Employer had
engaged in conduct which interfered with the rights of the employees-.
freely to designate their bargaining representative. In accordance
with the Rules and Regulations of the Board, the Regional Director-
conducted an investigation. On November 24, 1950, he issued and
served upon the parties his report on objections, in which he found
that the objections raised substantial and material issues, and recom-
mended that the objections be sustained and that the election be set
aside. He further recommended, in accordance with the request of
the Petitioner, that it be permitted to withdraw its petition without
prejudice. On December 11, 1950, the Employer timely filed excep-
tions to the Regional Director's report.
The Petitioner's request that the election be set aside rests upon
undisputed facts. On August 3, 1950, about a week after the petition
was filed, Powell, the Employer's president, addressed the employees
at a meeting in the plant and told them that the Employer could not
grant any wage increase because of its poor financial position. On
September 27, the Employer announced a wage increase of 10 cents
per hour; the raise was put into effect on October 2, before we issued
the Direction of Election. In his speech announcing the raise, Powell
explained it on the following grounds : The general rise in the cost of
living following the outbreak of hostilities in Korea in June 1950; the
widespread incidence of wage increases contemporaneously being
granted throughout the country ; the Employer's policy of adhering
to the changes of the national wage pattern; and the necessity of in-
creasing wages in order to hold employees who would otherwise be
attracted by higher wages in other industries. On October 30, 1950,
a few hours before the election was held, Powell again addressed the
191 NLRB No. 145.
93 NLRB No. 47.
30 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
employees and repeated his assertion that the wage increase had been
given only out of a necessity to offset the current increase in the cost
-of living, adding that it had not been granted because of the Peti-
,tioner's organizational campaign.2
Relying primarily upon the Employer's complete about-face in
the matter of wage increases, the Regional Director found that the
first speech, in which any wage increase was precluded, and the
second, in which an increase was announced, were both related to the
pending question of representation. He concluded that the wage in-
crease and the speeches had the reasonable effect of preventing the
employees' free choice of a bargaining agent. We 3 do not agree.
Careful examination of the Employer's three speeches, apart from
the wage increase announced, shows that they contain only factual
statements and expressions of opinion entirely privileged under Sec-
tion 8 (c) of the Act. The wage increase was announced 2 weeks be-
fore the Board's decision issued, and more than a month before the
election. It is clear that the Petitioner was aware of the increase; it
characterized it as illegal, and, as part of the election campaign, con-
tended that the increase was not enough to meet the rising cost of liv-
ing. Although it accused the Employer of impropriety, it did not
throughout this period protest that the wage increase made a fair
-election impossible. Nor did it file any unfair labor practice charges
based upon the announcement. Instead, it took its chances, preferring
to await the result of the election. Without passing upon the question
as to whether the Employer's activity here objected to might, in other
circumstances, be deemed to have constituted interference with the
election, we conclude on all the facts here, and more particularly be-
cause of the Petitioner's past acquiescence, that there is no warrant
,in this case for setting aside the election 4
Upon the basis of the foregoing, we find, contrary to the Regional
Director, that the objections filed by the Petitioner do not raise sub-
stantial or material issues. Accordingly, we hereby overrule the
objections. As no collective bargaining representative was chosen in
.the election, we shall dismiss the petition.
Order
TT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition filed herein be, and it hereby
is, dismissed.
2 In its exceptions to the Regional Director's report, the Employer also justifies the
raise on the basis of comparable increases granted simultaneously in other industries in,
the same area.
3 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 [ Chairman Herzog and
Members Houston and Reynolds].
4 International Harvester Company, West Pullman Works, 93 NLRB No. 48 ; The Good-
year Tire and Rubber Company, 85 NLRB 136; Greater New York Broadcasting Company,
Radio Station WNEW, 85 NLRB 414; E. I. Dupont De Nemours and Company, 81 NLRB
238.