NUVERRA ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 8, 2016

08-RC-164447 (N.L.R.B. Jul. 8, 2016)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
NUVERRA ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS, INC
Employer
and Case 08-RC-164447
TEAMSTERS LOCAL #348
Petitioner
ORDER
The Employer’s Request for Review of the Regional Director’s Decision and Order
Overruling Objection and Certification of Representative is denied as it raises no substantial
issues warranting review.1
PHILIP A. MISCIMARRA, MEMBER
KENT Y. HIROZAWA, MEMBER

1 We agree with the Regional Director’s conclusion that, under the test articulated in B & D
Plastics, Inc., 302 NLRB 245 (1991), the Employer has not shown that the Petitioner’s holiday
ham giveaway tended to unlawfully influence the outcome of the election. Although a
potentially dispositive number of employees received free hams, the hams were of modest value
($10-$12) and the giveaway’s purpose, reflected in the announcement in the Petitioner’s
newsletter, was to extend holiday greetings to the Petitioner’s members, their families and
friends. The Petitioner informed only one unit employee (and only when that employee
inquired) that unit employees were eligible for the giveaway; attending the giveaway and
accepting the hams were both entirely voluntary; at no point did the Petitioner link the giveaway
to the pending election; and the Petitioner gave hams only to those employees who attended the
giveaway. Under these circumstances, none of the unit employees who became aware of their
eligibility to receive a ham could have reasonably viewed the giveaway as intended to influence
their votes. Although the giveaway took place 5-6 days before the election, we find the
giveaway’s proximity to the election not dispositive under these circumstances. The Board has
declined to set aside elections where a benefit was granted even closer to the election. See, e.g.,
Chicagoland Television News. Inc., 328 NLRB 367, 367 (1991) (food and drink provided the
day before the election); see also Sequel of New Mexico, 361 NLRB No. 127 (2014). Finally,
even assuming the giveaway warranted an inference that the free hams were coercive, the
Petitioner has rebutted this inference by providing an explanation for the timing of the giveaway
unrelated to the election, given the uncontradicted evidence that the giveaway is a yearly event
that is open to all current as well as prospective members of the Petitioner.
LAUREN McFERRAN, MEMBER
Dated, Washington, D.C., July 8, 2016.