Dyna-Fab, Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 30, 1984

270 N.L.R.B. 394 (N.L.R.B. 1984)

DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Dyna-Fab, Corp. and International Union, United
Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Imple-
ment Workers of America, UAW, Petitioner.
Case 25-RC-7958
30 April 1984
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND
CERTIFICATION OF
REPRESENTATIVE
BY CHAIRMAN DOTSON AND MEMBERS
ZIMMERMAN AND DENNIS
The National Labor Relations Board, by a three-
member panel, has considered objections to an
election held 13 October 1983 and the hearing offi-
cer's report recommending disposition of them.
The election was conducted pursuant to a Stipulat-
ed Election Agreement. The tally of ballots shows
seven for and six against the Petitioner, with no
challenged ballots.
The Board has reviewed the record in light of
the exceptions and brief, has adopted the hearing
officer's findings' and recommendations as modi-
fied below, and finds that a certification of repre-
sentative should be issued.
About 3 October 1983 the Petitioner sent a letter
to the Employer's employees reading in part:
INITIATION FEES: It is the policy in Region
3 (Indiana and Kentucky) that at the time of
an NLRB election, to extend to ALL work-
ers in the plant, the opportunity of joining
the UA W WITHOUT paying an Initiation
Fee. The employees in your plant will have
this opportunity.
The hearing officer found that the Petitioner's
statement was ambiguous and arguably contra-
vened the principle enunciated in NLRB v. Savair
Mfg. Co., 414 U.S. 270 (1973), that a union promise
to waive membership initiation fees only for em-
ployees who sign dual purpose authorization cards
before an election constitutes grounds for setting
aside the election. She found that employees might
reasonably construe the words "at the time of the
election" to mean "until" or "prior to" the elec-
tion, implying that fees would be waived only for
employees who applied for membership before the
election.
The hearing officer further found, however, that
the Petitioner's actual policy regarding waiver of
initiation fees was lawful and the Petitioner's repre-
sentative clearly explained it to 9 of 13 eligible
I We note that King Wholesale, 264 NLRB No. 118 (Sept. 20, 1982),
which the hearing officer cited on pp. 2 and 3 of her report, was subse-
quently reconsidered and vacated by the Board at 266 NLRB 1163
(1983).
270 NLRB No. 73
voters at a meeting 17 August 1983.2 The hearing
officer concluded that it was unlikely that employ-
ees who attended the meeting would misinterpret
the 3 October letter and that it was reasonable to
conclude that those present conveyed the Petition-
er's explanation to those who did not attend. The
hearing officer also found that all 10 authorization
cards3 were signed by employees at the 17 August
meeting and that no additional cards or member-
ship applications were subsequently received by the
Petitioner. She therefore concluded that no em-
ployees signed cards or membership applications
relying on the representations in the 3 October
letter. Accordingly, the hearing officer recom-
mended that the Employer's objection be over-
ruled.
Although agreeing with the hearing officer that
the objection should be overruled, we rely solely
on her finding that all authorization cards were
signed before the 3 October letter was distributed,
and that no additional authorization cards or mem-
bership applications were signed after 3 October.
We find the Savair rationale inapplicable under
such circumstances. The Savair Court was con-
cerned that a waiver of initiation fees only for
those employees who apply for membership or sign
authorization cards before an election constitutes
the buying of endorsements by the union, paints a
false portrait of the extent of employee support
during an election campaign, and may cause some
employees who sign up as a result of the waiver to
vote for the union out of a sense of moral obliga-
tion. In the case where, as here, an arguably am-
biguous waiver of initiation fees did not result in
the execution of any authorization cards or mem-
bership applications, no endorsements were pur-
chased and no false portrait of employee support
could have been painted. Nor would any employ-
ees have felt morally impelled to vote for the Peti-
tioner based on a benefit extended by the Union in
connection with signing a card or joining. Finally,
the cards the employees executed did not constitute
applications for membership.
2 The Petitioner's policy provides for waiver of initiation fees for all
employees who apply for union membership both before and after an
election, and before a specific postelection "cutoff' date the employees
establish after the election. Fees are waived for all employees who join
the Union before the "cutoff' date, regardless of whether they were em-
ployed by the Employer at the time of the election.
Ten employees attended the meeting, nine of whom were eligible to
vote at the time of the election.
3 The hearing officer noted that the signed cards were single purpose
cards, which authorized the Petitioner to represent the signer for collec-
tive-bargaining purposes, but did not constitute an application for mem-
bership.
394
DYNA-FAB, CORP.
CERTIFICATION OF
REPRESENTATIVE
IT IS CERTIFIED that a majority of the valid
ballots have been cast for International Union,
United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Im-
plement Workers of America, UAW and that it is
the exclusive collective-bargaining representative
of the employees in the following appropriate unit:
All production and maintenance employees of
the Employer at its West Lebanon, Indiana, fa-
cility; BUT EXCLUDING all office clerical
employees, and all guards, professional em-
ployees and supervisors as defined in the Act.
395