American Partition Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 7, 1952

100 N.L.R.B. 1 (N.L.R.B. 1952)

AMERICAN PARTITION CORPORATION and FEDERAL LABOR UNION,
LOCAL #22026 , A. F. OF L., PETITIONER . Case No. 4-RC-1496.
Judy 7,195d
Supplemental Decision and Direction
Pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election issued herein on
April 29, 1952, an election by secret ballot was conducted on May 19,
1952, under the supervision and direction of the Regional Director for
the Fourth Region, among the employees of the Employer in the unit
found appropriate by the Board. Following the election, a tally of
ballots was furnished the parties. The tally shows that of approxi-
mately 24 eligible voters, 11 cast ballots for, and 11 against, the Peti-
tioner, with 2 ballots challenged. Thereafter, the Petitioner filed
objections to the election.
The Regional Director investigated the objections to the election
and the challenges. In a report and recommendation on objections
and challenges issued on June 4, 1952, and duly served upon the parties,
he recommended that the objections and the challenge to the ballot of
Alfred Schoonmaker be overruled, and the challenge to the ballot of
August Meyer be sustained. No exceptions have been filed to the
Regional Director's recommendation for overruling the Petitioner's
objections and for sustaining the challenge to August Meyer's ballot.
The Employer has filed exceptions to the recommendation for open-
ing and counting the challenged ballot of Alfred Schoonmaker, not
upon the ground that Schoonmaker was ineligible to vote,' but because
to count his ballot now would destroy the secrecy of the ballot. We
find no merit in this contention. It is true that Schoonmaker's vote
will be publicly known if his ballot is opened and counted, but this is
an unavoidable result of the challenge procedure. In the present case,
only one challenged vote is involved, but the same argument can be
made to opening two, three, four, or any number of challenged ballots,
since there is always the possibility that all challenged voters will vote
the same way and their choices will therefore become known. We
believe that the policies of the Act will best be effectuated by counting
the ballots of all eligible voters in determining the choice of a bar-
gaining representative, even if, as the result of the challenge proce-
dure, the choice of one or more eligible voters has to become public
knowledge.
1 The Petitioner challenged Schoonmaker 's right to vote
100 NLRB No. 9.
1
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
As there have been no exceptions filed to the merits of the Regional
Director's recommendations for disposing of the objections to the elec-
tion and the challenges, we hereby adopt them and overrule the Peti-
tioner's objections to the election, sustain the challenge to the ballot of
August Meyer, and overrule that to the ballot of Alfred Schoonmaker.
We shall direct that Schoonmaker's ballot be opened and counted.
Direction
IT IS HEREBY DIRECTED that the Regional Director for the Fourth
Region shall, within ten (10) days from the date of this Direction,
ripen and count the ballot of Alfred Schoonmaker, and shall thereafter
serve upon the parties a supplemental tally of ballots, including therein
the count of this ballot.
MEMBERS STYLES and PETERSON took no part in the consideration
of the above Supplemental Decision and Direction.
SAM BURKA , HARRY L. BURKA, DORA BURKA & NORMAN H. BURKA,
PARTNERS D/B/A BLUE BANNER LAUNDRY & CLEANERS and CLEANERS
& LAUNDRY WORKERS, LOCAL 457, AMALGAMATED CLOTHING WORKERS
OF AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER . Case No. 5-RC-975. July 7, 1951
Supplemental Decision and Certification of Representatives
On April 3, 1952, pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election
issued by the Board on March 10, 1952,1 an election by secret ballot was
conducted under the direction and supervision of the Regional Direc-
tor for the Fifth Region, among the employees of the Employer in the
unit found appropriate in the Decision. At the conclusion of the
election, the parties were furnished with a tally of ballots which shows
that, of approximately 66 eligible voters, 64 cast ballots, of which 34
were for the Petitioner, 29 were against the Petitioner, and 1 was void.
On April 9, 1952, the Employer filed objections to conduct affecting
the results of the election. In accordance with the Rules and Regula-
tions of the Board, the Regional Director conducted an investigation
of the objections and on May 1, 1952, issued and served upon the parties
his report on objections, in which he recommended that the objections
be overruled as they did not raise substantial and material issues with
respect to the election. Thereafter, the Employer filed timely excep-
tions to the Regional Director's report on objections.
As a basis for its objections, the Employer alleged that (1) just
before the election, the Petitioner, in writing and otherwise, dissem-
1 Not reported in printed volumes of Board decisions.
100 NLRB No. 10.