Cornnuts, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 15, 1994

314 N.L.R.B. 1133 (N.L.R.B. 1994)

1133
314 NLRB No. 177
CORNNUTS, INC.
1 The Regional Director found no merit to the Employer’s objec-
tions involving certain statements allegedly made by the Board agent
to the observers during the Thursday night polling session. In sup-
port of his finding, the Regional Director observed that these con-
versations occurred after the observers had voted. The Employer ar-
gues that the Regional Director erred because its evidence (see at-
tached appendix) shows that these discussions must have occurred
before the observers had voted. Given the innocuous nature of these
remarks attributed to the Board agent, we find it unnecessary to re-
solve this dispute over timing. We therefore overrule the objections
based on the substance of the remarks rather than their timing.
In adopting the Regional Director’s recommendation to overrule
the Employer’s objections concerning leadperson Lisa Garrett’s
prounion conduct, we rely only on the fact that the Employer is at-
tempting to raise postelection challenges in the form of objections,
which is not permitted. See Poplar Living Center, 300 NLRB 888
(1990). We therefore find it unnecessary to pass on the Regional Di-
rector’s alternative analysis based on an assumption that Garrett is
a supervisor. However, we correct the Regional Director’s typo-
graphical error in referring to Garrett as Ken Hellwig, the Employ-
er’s plant manager, in the last sentence of his analysis of her con-
duct.
In adopting the Regional Director’s overrruling of the Employer’s
objection, we emphasize that we have viewed the Employer’s evi-
dence in the light most favorable to the Employer. See Frontier
Hotel, 265 NLRB 343 (1982); Bell Foundry Co. v. NLRB, 827 F.2d
1340 (9th Cir. 1987). In our view, the Employer’s evidence, viewed
in this light, does not establish a basis for setting aside the election.
Cornnuts, Inc. and Bakery, Confectionery & To-
bacco Workers International Union of Amer-
ica, Local 85, AFL–CIO, Petitioner. Case 32–
RC–3782
September 15, 1994
DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF
REPRESENTATIVE
BY MEMBERS STEPHENS, DEVANEY, AND COHEN
The National Labor Relations Board, by a three-
member panel, has considered objections to an election
held on October 14 and 15, 1993, and the Regional Di-
rector’s report recommending disposition of them. The
tally of ballots shows 31 for and 14 against the Peti-
tioner, with 1 challenged ballot, an insufficient number
to affect the results.
The Board has reviewed the record in light of the
exceptions and briefs, has adopted the Regional Direc-
tor’s findings1 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 Bakery, Confectionery & Tobacco
Workers International Union of America, Local 85,
AFL–CIO and that it is the exclusive collective-bar-
gaining representative of the employees in the fol-
lowing appropriate unit:
All full time and regular part-time production and
maintenance employees, leadpersons, warehouse
employees, utility department and sanitation em-
ployees employed by the Employer at its Fresno,
California production facility; excluding man-
agers, production control coordinators, quality
control coordinators, office clerical employees,
guards and supervisors as defined in the Act.
Appendix
In support of its objections to the Board agent’s comments
to observers, the Employer relies on paragraphs 10 and 11
of the declaration of Ron Johnson, an observer. Those para-
graphs follow.
10. During the Thursday night polling, we had nu-
merous discussions with the NLRB Agent. Among
other things, we discussed the history of Cornnuts and
how the product was grown, seasoned, packaged and
marketed. She indicated that she was familiar with the
product and knew that it had been around for a while—
almost 50 years. She remembered eating them when she
was a youngster. The NLRB Agent raised union orga-
nizing in our industry. The Agent brought up the fact
that she visited a company in her Region’s jurisdiction
where the employer manufactured the same sort of film
packaging that we use at Cornnuts. The NLRB Agent
indicated that she had a case involving an election at
the plant where the packaging was produced. There are
not many film packaging producers in the area, and I
assumed it was a company that had supplied Cornnuts
in the past. The NLRB Agent raised union organizing
on Friday too. On Friday she told us about elections
she held at the agency for 911 emergency service and
for medical staff at a prison.
11. During the Thursday night polling, the NLRB
Agent discussed growing up in the 1960’s. At one point
she raised going to a convention recently where two
speakers addressed living in communes in the ’60’s and
being in demonstrations where one of the speakers was
arrested for carrying a shotgun. She told us that she at-
tended the convention, because it involved matters of a
professional nature. Adam brought up the free life and
drugs of the ’60’s. The NLRB Agent told us that she
never took drugs, but her mother asked her about it all
the time. She told us that parents in the ’60’s were not
as worried about their children as they are now. She
said that parents are more concerned about childrens’
drug use today. One of the big campaign issues before
the election was health coverage and whether the Union
could obtain Kaiser coverage for us at a low cost.