C & D Security

National Labor Relations Board - Unpublished Board Decisions

Sep 28, 2010

04-RC-021636 (N.L.R.B. Sep. 28, 2010)

NOT INCLUDED LBH
IN BOUND VOLUMES Philadelphia, PA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
C and D ENTERPRISES, INC.,
d/b/a C&D SECURITY
Employer
and Case 4-RC-21636
UNITED GOVERNMENT SECURITY OFFICERS
OF AMERICA, INTERNATIONAL UNION
Petitioner
and
INTERNATIONAL UNION, SECURITY, POLICE
AND FIRE PROFESSIONALS OF AMERICA,
LOCAL 444 (SPFPA)
Union Involved
DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVE
The National Labor Relations Board, by a three-member panel,
has considered objections to a mail-ballot election held between
February 1 and February 18, 2010, and the hearing officer's
report recommending disposition of them. The election was
conducted pursuant to a Stipulated Election Agreement. The
tally of ballots shows 68 ballots cast for the Petitioner,
United Government Security Officers of America, International
Union; 19 ballots cast for the Union Involved, International
Union, Security, Police, and Fire Professionals of America,
Local 444 (SPFPA); and 3 ballots cast against the participating
labor organizations. There were no challenged ballots.
The Board has reviewed the record in light of the exceptions
and briefs, has adopted the hearing officer's findings' and
recommendations , and finds that a certification of
representative should be issued.
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVE
IT IS CERTIFIED that a majority of the valid ballots have
been cast for United Government Security Officers of America,
1 In the absence of exceptions, we adopt pro forma the
hearing officer's overruling of SPFPA's Objections 1, 5, 6, 7,
8, 9, 10, and 13.
2 The hearing officer correctly recommended overruling
SPFPA's Objection 2, alleging that the Employer impermissibly
promised unit employees a pay raise. That pay raise had been
previously negotiated with SPFPA, was included in its contract
with the Employer, and the Employer made clear that it would be
implemented regardless of the outcome of the election. The
Employer therefore was simply affirming its statutory obligation
to honor the pay raise. Cf. More Truck Lines, 336 NLRB 772,
772-774 (2001), enfd. 324 F.3d 735 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (employer
violated Sec. 8(a) (1) and engaged in objectionable conduct when
it told employees that if an outside union won the election, the
employees would lose the scheduled wage increases that it had
negotiated with the incumbent union).
The hearing officer also correctly recommended overruling
SPFPA's Objections 3 and 4, alleging that the Employer
restricted its access to unit employees at three buildings. Few
employees witnessed the incidents at the buildings, there was no
evidence of dissemination, and there was no evidence of the
number of unit employees working in the buildings. In those
circumstances, we find that SPFPA has not established a basis
for setting aside the election, in which employees elected the
Petitioner by a decisive margin. Further, we find it
International Union, and that it is the exclusive collective-
bargaining representative of the employees in the following
appropriate unit:
All full time and regular part time security officers,
corporals and sergeants employed by the Employer at
its GSA sites in Philadelphia, Montgomery, Delaware,
Bucks and Chester Counties, Pennsylvania, excluding
all other employees, office clerical employees,
lieutenants, captains and supervisors as defined in
the Act.
Dated, Washington, D.C., September 28, 2010.
Wilma B. Liebman, Chairman
Craig Becker, Member
Brian E. Hayes, Member
(SEAL) NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
unnecessary to rely on the hearing officer's discussion of
alternative means of communication available to SPFPA.
3