Sewanee Coal Operators' Association, Inc.Download PDFNational Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsApr 28, 1964146 N.L.R.B. 1145 (N.L.R.B. 1964) Copy Citation SEWANEE COAL OPERATORS' ASSOCIATION, INC. 1145 Sewanee Coal Operators' Association , Inc. and United Mine Workers of America , Petitioner Grundy Mining Company and Local No. 139, Southern Labor Union , Petitioner M. A. Payne , Inc. and Local No. 139, Southern Labor Union, Petitioner Stephenson Bros. Coal Co., Inc . and Local No . 139, Southern Labor Union , Petitioner.' Cases Nos. 10-RC-5497, 10-RC-5593, 10-RC-5604, and 10-RC-5605. April 28, 1964 SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND ORDER Pursuant to the Board's Decision and Direction of Election issued on September 20, 1963,2 an election by secret ballot was conducted on October 15, 1963, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Tenth Region, among employees in the appropriate unit. Upon the conclusion of the balloting, the parties were furnished with a tally of ballots which showed that of approximately 660 eligible voters, 579 cast ballots, of which 108 were for UMW, 50 were for SLU, none were against the participating labor organizations, and 421 were challenged. The challenged ballots are sufficient in number to affect the results of the election. Thereafter, Grundy and SLU filed timely objections to conduct affecting the results of the election. On Decem- ber 23, 1963, Sewanee filed a petition requesting that the Board amend its Decision of September 20, 1963, and specifically spell out the names of the coal companies in business whose employees are entitled to vote as members of Sewanee Coal Operators Association. UMW filed a response thereto 3 In accordance with the Board's Rules and Regulations, the Regional Director conducted an investigation, and, on December 17, 1963, issued and served upon the parties his report on objections and challenged ballots, in which he recommended that certain portions of the objections be sustained and the remainder overruled, that a hearing be held before 1 The parties are hereinafter referred to as follows : Sewanee Coal Operators ' Association, Inc., as Sewanee ; Grundy Mining Company, as Grundy ; M. A. Payne, Inc., as Payne; Stephenson Bros. Coal Co.,. Inc., as Stephenson ; United Mine Workers of America, as UMW ; and, Local No. 139, Southern Labor Union , as SLU. 2 Not published in NLRB volumes. 3 In its petition , Sewanee offered to show that some 1'8 coal companies are no longer in business but remain members of Sewanee, and that only 12 among approximately 30 mem- bers of Sewanee remain in, and intend to remain in, business . In view of our decision herein overruling the objections , we hereby deny the request to amend the unit for pur- poses of eligibility to vote. However , Sewanee will have opportunity, at the hearing hereinafter ordered, to establish the operational status of any company as of the time-of the election insofar as such status may be germane to determining the eligibility of any challenged voter.. 146 NLRB' No. 140. . ` 1146 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD a Trial Examiner to resolve issues raised by the challenges, and that the election be set aside and a new one directed, subsequent to the hearing. Thereafter, UMW filed timely exceptions to the Regional Director's report, and a supporting brief. The Board has considered the Regional Director's report, the excep- tions thereto, and the entire record in the case, and makes the following findings : UMIV excepted to the Regional Director's recommendations to sus- tain the portions of the objections relating to preelection violence and to electioneering and crowding of people at the polls. The alleged preelection violence related to two incidents which oc- curred in April and May 1963, more than 5 months before the election. Each incident was the subject of separate charges, which resulted in findings of Section 8(b) (1) (A) coercion 4 As found by the Trial Examiner in those two cases, on April 24, 1963, UMW, Local 7244 and its supporters engaged in mob threats and violence against employees of Grundy to prevent them from meeting to organize and elect officers for a Grundy local of SLU; and on May 7, 1963, UMW, Local 7083 and its supporters engaged in mob threats and violence to prevent Grundy strike replacements from going to work at the Grundy minesite. These two incidents occurred in the context of an economic strike called by UMW against Grundy commencing December 26, 1962; UMW's petition herein, filed February 25, 1963, for a multiemployer unit of Sewanee members' employees including Grundy's; and UMW's charges of unlawful assistance by Grundy to an independent union, which charges, under Board practice, blocked the processing of UMW's representation petition. On May 20, 1963, a settlement agree- ment with respect to UMW's charges of Section 8(a) (2) assistance was approved by the Regional Director, and on May 23, 1963, SLU filed its petition herein seeking a separate unit of Grundy employees. The Board found a multiemployer unit, including Grundy's to be appropriate, in the event a majority of employees in such unit voted for UMW or SLU, and, as above indicated, the election was conducted on October 15,1963. Unlike the Regional Director, we conclude that in the circumstances above outlined, UMW's strike misconduct, found violative of the Act, could have no substantial impact on voter free choice in the election. In view of the lapse of more than 5 months from the occurrence of the strike violence in question to the holding of the election, and the ab- sence of any showing that in this interval of time any other coercive ' United Mine Workers of America , Local No. 7083 ( Grundy Mining Company), 146 NLRB 176; and United Mine Workers of America, Local No . 7244 (Grundy Mining Com- ipany ), 146 NLRB 244. In each case the Trial Examiner's Decision, later adopted by the Board, had issued prior to the issuance of the Regional Director's report herein. SEWANEE COAL OPERATORS' ASSOCIATION, INC. 1147 conduct was directed at employees in the unit, we find that the incidents relied on in the objections were unrelated to the election and too remote to have a probable effect upon the election.5 As to those portions of the objections relating to electioneering and crowding at the polls, the Regional Director found that a large num- ber of persons including strikers, nonstrikers, replacements, and others congregated on the sidewalk and street immediately outside the polling place before and during the polling period. The election was con- ducted in a vacant store on the courthouse square at Jasper, Ten- nessee,6 on a day the criminal court was in session. Four Board agents conducting the election were assisted by two U.S. marshals. The crowd was estimated to number from 200 to 2,000 at various times, with a line of voters 4 to 6 deep extending from the entrance of the polling place down the sidewalk for a block or more. While the polls were opened, several unidentified persons circulated about the voting line outside the polling place wearing placards reading "Vote For United Mine Workers And Be Able To Get A Pension." The Board agent did not specify any "no electioneering area" but did caution representatives not to enter the polling place during the election. The Regional Director based his finding concerning crowding upon pic- torial evidence submitted during investigation.? However, he does not point to any specific incidents of disorderliness or coercive con- duct but merely couples the evidence of electioneering and crowding immediately outside the polling place with the much earlier incidents of 'strike violence which we have found to be too remote to have an effect upon the election. We conclude that, under the facts here, the presence of a crowd or a massing of voters at the entrance to the polling place and the placard electioneering by unidentified persons on behalf of UMW in the area outside the polls, standing alone, did not impair the exercise of free choice in the election. In view of the foregoing, we hereby overrule the objections in their entirety.8 Accordingly, we shall direct that a hearing be held before a Trial Examiner of the Board to resolve the issues raised by the 421 chal- lenged ballots herein. 5 See, e.g., Southdown Sugars , Inc., 108 NLRB 114; Krambo Pood Stores, Inc., 101 NLRB 742, 743; The Laclede Gas Light Company, 80 NLRB 839, 841. e Jasper was selected as the site of the election in part because It had not been the scene of any preelection violence and adequate law enforcement ' was available . ' The site was suggested by attorneys for Sewanee and Grundy and approved by the Regional Director. 7 In Its exceptions , UMW 'asserts that' it knows of 'only four pictures taken of the elec- tion and attached those pictures to Its brief . The pictures 'appeared in area 'newspapers, and the 'accompanying stories described the crowd as orderly and the election 'aswithout disorder . In addition , UMW attached afdavi 'ts from law enforcement officers , merchants, county officials, and other ciiizens'of Jasper who observed the election and found it proper and orderly. g Absent exceptions , we adopt pro forma, the Regional Director's -recommendations to overrule certain portions of the objections , as well as his recommendations for a hearing as to the challenges. 1148 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD [The Board ordered that a hearing be held before a Trial Examiner on the issues raised by the 421 challenged ballots and that the Trial Examiner serve upon the parties a report containing resolutions of the credibility of witnesses, findings of fact, and recommendations to the Board as to the disposition of said issues. Within 10 days from the date of issuance of such report, any party may file with the Board in Washington, D.C., an original and six copies of exceptions thereto. Immediately upon the filing of such exceptions, the party filing shall serve copy upon each of the other parties, and shall file a copy with the Regional Director. If no exceptions are filed the Board will adopt the recommendations of the Trial Examiner.] [The Board further ordered that the above-entitled matter be re- ferred to said Regional Director for the purpose of conducting a hearing, and issuing early notice.] United States Plywood Corporation , Petitioner and Interna- tional Woodworkers of America , Local 3-140, AFL-CIO. Case No. 36-RM-322. April 28, 1964 DECISION AND ORDER Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Hearing Officer E. G. Strumpf. The Hearing Officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.' Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three- member panel [Chairman McCulloch and Members Leedom and Fanning]. Upon the entire record in this case,2 the Board finds : 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act and it will effectuate the purposes of the Act to assert juris- diction herein. 2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain em- ployees of the Employer. i We find no merit in the Union 's motions that this case be dismissed or held in abeyance because at the time of the hearing there was pending before the General Counsel its appeal from the Regional Director 's dismissal of its charge alleging the Employer unlawfully failed to bargain in good faith with the Union concerning certain employees involved in this proceeding . See Loui8viile Cap Co ., 120 NLRB 769. 2 we find no merit in the Union 's contention that a new hearing is warranted because the Employer 's witnesses used allegedly confusing and unclear terms in describing its opera- tions. The record is adequately clear with respect to the nature of such operations despite the varying terminology employed by the parties' witnesses. 146 NLRB No. 141. Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation