Cargill Incorporated d/b/a Dent's Poultry

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 25, 1982

260 N.L.R.B. 1219 (N.L.R.B. 1982)

DENT'S POULTRY
Cargill Incorporated d/b/a Dent's Poultry and
Southeast Council, Retail, Wholesale & Depart-
ment Store Union, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case
10-RC-12283
March 25, 1982
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF
SECOND ELECTION
BY MEMBERS FANNING, JENKINS, AND
ZIMMERMAN
Pursuant to authority granted it under Section
3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as
amended, a three-member panel has considered the
objections to an election t held on February 13,
1981, and the Hearing Officer's report recommend-
ing disposition of same. The Board has reviewed
the record in light of the exceptions and hereby af-
firms the Hearing Officer's findings and recommen-
dations, except insofar as they pertain to Objections
3 and 8.
Objection 3 alleges that the Employer threatened
employees with economic reprisals because of their
union activities, sympathies, and desires. Both the
Employer's and Petitioner's witnesses testified that
in early January 1981, the Employer's vice presi-
dent informed employees that, as of August 15,
1980, they were covered under a pension plan, but
that because only nonunion plants were covered
under the plan, coverage would be discontinued if
the Union was voted in. The Hearing Officer found
that the announcement was an attempt to wean em-
ployees away from the Union and discriminated be-
tween union and nonunion employees. She con-
cluded that it is the type of conduct long found to
be violative of Section 8(a)(1) and sustained the ob-
jection.
Objection 8 alleges that "the Employer threat-
ened its employees that selection of Petitioner as
their bargaining representative would prevent any
employee from taking up his or her grievance or
'The election was conducted pursuant to a Stipulation for Certifica-
tion Upon Consent Election The tally was 44 for, and 80 against, Peti-
tioner; there were 4 challenged ballots, a number insufficient to affect the
results.
problem directly with management." Two wit-
nesses for Petitioner testified that at a mass meet-
ing, General Manager Jimmy Dent stated that if
the Union was voted in, the employees could not
come to the Company with their grievances, but
would have to go through the union steward or
representative who would then be responsible for
going to the Company. This testimony was cor-
roborated by Dent, and the Hearing Officer found
this statement also to be the type of conduct viola-
tive of Section 8(a)(1), and sustained the objection.
We agree with the Hearing Officer that the
above conduct is objectionable, but we do not
agree with her conclusion that it is not sufficiently
objectionable "to warrant a finding that the elec-
tion be set aside," or with her supporting rationale.
We find it unnecessary to determine in this pro-
ceeding the unfair labor practice nature of that
conduct or its relationship to Section 8(a)(l) of the
Act. Further, we disagree with her conclusions
that the conduct, though objectionable, is so
remote and neither ". . . so severe or threatening
to be deemed coercive . . ." nor " . . . of such
magnitude as to have had a serious impact upon
the employees' freedom of choice." Although the
conduct occurred at the beginning of Petitioner's
campaign, there is no evidence that the Employer
retracted those statements during the course of the
campaign or in any way led the employees to be-
lieve that the Employer would not do what it
threatened to do in the event of a union victory.
The Board has found that such conduct constitutes
improper, objectionable threats to withdraw unilat-
erally existing benefits, and sufficiently interferes
with employees' freedom of choice to warrant set-
ting aside the election. Associated Roofing & Sheet
Metal Co., Inc., 255 NLRB 1349 (1981); Propellex
Corporation, a subsidiary of Essex Cryogenics Indus-
tries, Inc., 254 NLRB 839 (1981). Accordingly, we
shall direct that the election be set aside and a
second election be conducted.
[Direction of Second Election and Excelsior foot-
note omitted from publication.]
260 NLRB No. 167
1219