Pinnacle Foods Group, LLC

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 4, 2019

14-RD-226626 (N.L.R.B. Feb. 4, 2019)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
PINNACLE FOODS GROUP, LLC
Employer
and
ROBERT GENTRY Case 14-RD-226626
Petitioner
and
LOCAL 881 UNITED FOOD AND COMMERCIAL
WORKERS UNION
Union
ORDER
The Petitioner’s and the Employer’s Requests for Review of the Acting Regional
Director’s Order Granting Union’s Request to Block the Petition and Order Canceling Hearing
are denied as they raise no substantial issues warranting review.1

1 For institutional reasons, Chairman Ring and Member Kaplan apply extant law in
denying the Requests for Review. However, in their view, this case highlights significant issues
with the law pertaining to blocking charges that potentially frustrate the rights of employees. In
particular, they note that here, the Acting Regional Director summarily granted the Union’s
request to block the election on the same day an unfair labor practice charge was filed. The
election remains blocked even though the Union failed to substantiate certain allegations it made
in its initial unfair labor practice charge in Case 14-CA-226922. And although a complaint
ultimately issued upon an amended charge, the timing of the initial charge—filed 18 months after
the Union’s certification and 12 months after the parties began bargaining, but only days after the
decertification petition was filed—suggests that its primary purpose was to delay the
decertification election. In light of such an example of suspect timing, and for other reasons, the
Board intends to revisit the blocking charge policy in a future rulemaking proceeding.
Member McFerran concurs with her colleagues in denying the Requests for Review. In
joining her colleagues in denying review, Member McFerran does so because the Acting
Regional Director’s decision to block the election is consistent with the Board’s longstanding
blocking charge policy and Board precedent.
Finally, Member McFerran notes that she was not part of any decision by the Board
majority to revisit the blocking charge policy in a future rulemaking. She anticipates that all
JOHN F. RING, CHAIRMAN
LAUREN McFERRAN, MEMBER
MARVIN E. KAPLAN, MEMBER
Dated, Washington, D.C., February 4, 2019.

Board members, whatever their prior expressed views in connection with blocking-charge issues,
will keep an open mind during any future rulemaking on the subject.