Bi-Lo Foods

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 30, 1994

315 N.L.R.B. 695 (N.L.R.B. 1994)

695
315 NLRB No. 98
BI-LO FOODS
1 All dates occur in 1994 unless otherwise noted.
2 299 NLRB 514 (1990).
3 Koons Ford, 308 NLRB 1067 (1992); Public Storage, 295 NLRB
1034 (1989); and Star Video Entertainment L.P., 290 NLRB 1010
(1988).
4 The National Labor Relations Board has delegated its authority
in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
5 301 NLRB 300 (1991).
6 Member Devaney agrees with his colleagues that the Employer’s
submission of evidence in support of its objections was timely. He
also finds the result here generally consistent with the approach he
has taken in his dissents in Goody’s, Koons, and Public Storage,
supra.
Jamb, Inc. d/b/a Bi-Lo Foods and Local 427, Hotel
Employees and Restaurant Employees Inter-
national Union, AFL–CIO, Petitioner. Case 19–
RC–12874
November 30, 1994
DECISION AND ORDER REMANDING
BY CHAIRMAN GOULD AND MEMBERS STEPHENS
AND DEVANEY
After an election held on July 14, 1994,1 pursuant
to a Stipulated Election Agreement, the Employer filed
timely objections that were received by the Regional
Office on July 22. The Regional Office then wrote the
Employer to advise him that evidence in support of his
objections was due in the Regional Office by close of
business on July 29 under the provisions of Section
102.69(a) of the Board’s Rules and Regulations. On
July 28, the Employer mailed evidence in support of
his objections to the Regional Office. That mailing,
however, did not arrive in the Regional Office until
August 1. Noting that the Employer had neither re-
quested nor received an extension of time for submit-
ting the evidence, the Regional Director recommended
overruling the Employer’s objections for lack of time-
liness. He relied on Craftmatic Comfort Mfg. Corp.,2
and a line of cases holding that time limits in the
Board’s Rules and Regulations are to be strictly ap-
plied.3
The Employer filed an exception to the Regional Di-
rector’s report and recommendation. The exception
stressed that the Employer had sent evidence support-
ing its objections by certified mail the day before the
due date. The Petitioner filed a response in support of
the Regional Director’s report and recommendation.
We find that the Employer’s exception has merit.4
The Regional Director failed to consider that the
Board, as announced in its decision in John I. Haas,
Inc.,5 revised Section 102.111(b) of the Rules and
Regulations to provide that evidence submitted in sup-
port of election objections postmarked no later than the
day before the due date will be considered timely. See
generally Goody’s Family Clothing, 308 NLRB 181
(1992), applying Section 102.111 to the submission of
evidence in support of objections. Thus, because the
Employer’s submission of evidence in support of his
objections was timely, even under a strict application
of the Board’s Rules and Regulations, we remand this
case to the Regional Director to consider the merits of
the Employer’s objections.6
ORDER
It is ordered that the Employer’s evidence in support
of its objections be accepted and that the above-enti-
tled matter be remanded to the Regional Director for
Region 19 for full consideration of these objections
and the supporting evidence.