Choctaw Provision Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 17, 1958

122 N.L.R.B. 474 (N.L.R.B. 1958)

474 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Choctaw Provision Company, Inc. and United Packinghouse
Workers of America , AFL-CIO, Petitioner . Case No. 15-RC-
1745. December 17, 1958
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND CERTIFICATION
OF REPRESENTATIVES
Pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election herein issued
on March 10, 1958,1 an election by secret ballot was conducted, on
March 31, 1958, under the direction and' supervision of the Re-
gional Director for the ' Fifteenth Region, among the employees in
the unit therein found appropriate by the Board. After the election,
the Regional Director served upon the parties a tally of ballots
which showed that of approximately 10 eligible voters, 10 ballots
were cast, of which 6 were cast for, and 4 were cast against, the
Petitioner. There were no challenged ballots.
On April 7, 1958, the Employer filed timely objections to conduct
affecting the results of the election. In accordance with the Board's
Rules and Regulations, these objections were investigated and on
October 9, 1958, the acting Regional Director issued and duly, served
upon the parties his report on objections in which he found that the
Employer's objections were without merit and did not raise sub-
stantial or material issues affecting the results of the election. Ac-
cordingly, he recommended that the objections be overruled and a
certification of representatives be issued. Thereafter, the Employer
filed timely exceptions to the Regional Director's report, with a
memorandum in support of its exceptions.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor
Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection
with this case to a three-member panel [Chairman Leedom and
Members Rodgers and Jenkins].
The Employer's objections allege in substance that:, (1)..the Peti-
tioner's business agent campaigned and electioneered in and about
the polling place for approximately 1 hour before the time set for
the election; (2) during the voting period, the same agent entered
the voting room, observed the proceedings and "presumably" elec-
tioneered for the Petitioner; and (3) all the voters remained in the
room where the election was conducted during, the entire period
that the polling place was open. It contends that such action inter-
fered with the conduct of the election and urges the Board to set
it aside and direct a new election, or, in the alternative, remand
the matter to the Regional Director for a hearing on the objections.
As to objection 1, the Regional Director's investigation disclosed
that the Petitioner's business agent spoke to some of the employees
prior to the election but that there was no evidence to indicate that
1 Unpublished.
122 NLRB No. 69.
CHOCTAW PROVISION COMPANY, INC. 475
he discussed the election or made any improper statements to them.
The Employer argues that it seems inconceivable that the business
agent would spend over an hour with the employees at the polling
place immediately prior to the election for any other purpose than
to electioneer. However, this is conjectural. None of the remarks
were overheard by the Employer's representatives and the investiga-
tion did not disclose the subject matter of the remarks. In the ab-
sence of evidence of coercive statements or willful violations of the
Board agent's instructions by the Petitioner's business agent, we
do not feel justified in inferring that electioneering occurred, or
that, if any did take place, it was serious enough to warrant setting
the election aside.2
As to objection 2, the Regional Director's investigation disclosed
that the Petitioner's business agent, on at least one occasion while
the election was in progress, entered the room in which the voting
took place, went to the water fountain for a drink of water, paused
briefly, and departed without speaking to anyone. The Employer
contends that his mere -presence in the voting area- in close proximity
to the voting table should be sufficient grounds for setting aside the
election. We do not agree. The investigation did not disclose any
evidence, and none has been presented by the Employer, to show
that the business agent made any remarks or engaged in any conduct
while in the polling area which might have affected the secrecy of
the ballot. We therefore find this objection without merit.
As to objection 3, the investigation disclosed that the voting
booths were located at one end of the warehouse and that after
voting, some of the 10 eligible voters went to another part of the
warehouse where they remained until the polls closed. As there has
been no showing that the Petitioner engaged in any campaigning
during the course of the election or in any other manner engaged
in.conduct which interfered with the balloting. or which might have
affected the secrecy of the ballot, we find this objection to be with-
out merit.3
Under all the circumstances, we find in agreement with the Re-
gional Director, that the objections do not raise substantial or mate-
rial issues with respect to conduct affecting the results of the election,
and the objections are hereby overruled.
As the Petitioner has received a majority of the valid votes cast
in the election, we shall certify it as the collective-bargaining. repre-
sentative of the employees in the appropriate unit.
[The Board certified United Packinghouse Workers of America,
AFL-CIO, as the designated collective-bargaining representative of
the employees in the unit heretofore found appropriate.]
2 See General Electric Company, 115 NLRB 306, 307.
3 See Deeco, Inc., 116 NLRB 990, 992; and Holmes & Barnes, Ltd., 114 NLRB 630, 631.