2101 LLC d/b/a Intercontinental Truck Body

National Labor Relations Board - Unpublished Board Decisions

May 28, 2020

19-RC-258144 (N.L.R.B. May. 28, 2020)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
2101 LLC d/b/a INTERCONTINENTAL TRUCK
BODY
Employer
and Case 19-RC-258144
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
MACHINISTS AND AEROSPACE WORKERS,
LODGE 88, AFL-CIO
Petitioner
ORDER
The Employer’s Request for Review of the Regional Director’s Decision and Direction of
Election is denied as it raises no substantial issues warranting review.1 The Employer’s request
for extraordinary relief is denied as moot.
1 In denying review, we note that the Board’s decision in San Diego Gas & Electric, 325
NLRB 1143, 1145 (1998), recognizes that Board elections should, as a general rule, be
conducted manually and specifies well-settled guidelines for determining whether a mail-ballot
election would normally be appropriate. We agree with the Regional Director that, under normal
circumstances, this would almost certainly not be an election where a mail ballot would be
considered. But in San Diego Gas & Electric, the Board also recognized that “there may be
other relevant factors that the Regional Director may consider in making this decision” and that
“extraordinary circumstances” could permit a Regional Director to exercise his or her discretion
outside of the guidelines set forth in that decision. Id.
In finding that a mail-ballot election is warranted in this case, we rely on the
extraordinary federal, state, and local government directives that have limited nonessential travel,
required the closure of nonessential businesses, and resulted in a determination that the regional
office charged with conducting this election should remain on mandatory telework. Mandatory
telework in the regional office is based on the Agency’s assessment of current Covid-19
pandemic conditions in the local area. Under all of the foregoing circumstances, we are satisfied
that the Regional Director did not abuse his discretion in ordering a mail-ballot election here.
The Employer also raises concerns about potential disenfranchisement of voters if the
ballots are delayed in the mail. While such concerns could be relevant to whether a mail-ballot
election is appropriate, the circumstances presented here fail to establish that the Regional
Director abused his discretion. Any party is free to present evidence of any actual
disenfranchisement of voters, if applicable, in post-election objections.
JOHN F. RING, CHAIRMAN
MARVIN E. KAPLAN, MEMBER
WILLIAM J. EMANUEL, MEMBER
Dated, Washington, D.C., May 28, 2020.
The Board is open to addressing the normal criteria for mail balloting in a future
appropriate proceeding.