Multiband EC, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Unpublished Board Decisions

Mar 12, 2013

25-UD-079779 (N.L.R.B. Mar. 12, 2013)

NOT INCLUDED IN PBG
BOUND VOLUMES Evansville and Indianapolis, IN;
Louisville and Lexington, KY;
Cincinnati, Akron, and
Cleveland, OH; Bloomington, IL;
Davenport, IA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
MULTIBAND EC, INC.
Employer
and Case 25-UD-079779
CHAUFFEURS, TEAMSTERS, WAREHOUSEMEN
AND HELPERS LOCAL UNION NO. 135
Union
and
ORLANDO CANTU
Petitioner
DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF RESULTS OF ELECTION
The National Labor Relations Board has considered
objections to a deauthorization election conducted by mail
ballot between May 25 and June 8, 2012, and the hearing
officer’s report recommending disposition of them. The election
was conducted pursuant to a Stipulated Election Agreement.
Approximately 963 employees were eligible to vote. The tally of
ballots shows 524 votes in favor of withdrawing the authority of
the Union to require in its collective-bargaining agreement that
2
employees make certain lawful payments to the Union in order to
retain their jobs. There were 60 votes against the proposition,
and no challenged ballots.
The Board has reviewed the record in light of the
exceptions and briefs, has adopted the hearing officer’s
findings1 and recommendations as modified,2 and finds that a
certification of results should be issued.
CERTIFICATION OF RESULTS OF ELECTION
It is certified that a majority of employees eligible to
vote have voted to withdraw the authority of Chauffeurs,
Teamsters, Warehousemen, and Helpers, Local Union No. 135 to
require, under its agreement with the Employer, that employees

1 The Union has implicitly excepted to some of the hearing
officer's credibility findings. The Board's established policy
is not to overrule a hearing officer's credibility resolutions
unless the clear preponderance of all the relevant evidence
convinces us that they are incorrect. Stretch-Tex Co., 118 NLRB
1359, 1361 (1957). We have carefully examined the record and
find no basis for reversing the findings.
2 We agree with the hearing officer that there is
insufficient evidence to establish that the Employer changed its
policy of allowing the Union access to employees. In this
regard, we emphasize the fact that, after the Employer denied
the Union’s requests for permission to visit the Employer’s
facilities on certain dates, the Union did not respond to the
Employer’s invitations to suggest alternate dates. We find it
unnecessary to rely on the hearing officer’s alternative finding
that any change in the policy was not “material, significant,
and substantial.”
In the absence of exceptions, we adopt pro forma the
hearing officer's recommendation to overrule the Union’s
Objection 2.
3
make certain lawful payments to that labor organization in order
to retain their jobs in conformity with Section 8(a)(3) of the
Act, as amended.
Dated, Washington, D.C., March 12, 2013.
__________________________________
Mark Gaston Pearce, Chairman
__________________________________
Richard F. Griffin, Jr., Member
__________________________________
Sharon Block, Member
(SEAL) NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD