Sylvania Electric Products, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 29, 1953

106 N.L.R.B. 1210 (N.L.R.B. 1953)

1210 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
objections. The Regional Director found that the plant clerical
employees were included in the unit description setforth in the
consent - election agreement and that Van Voorheis was a plant
clerical employee whose name appeared on the eligible list.
Under these circumstances, we perceive no impropriety in the
Board agent ' s statement that Van Voorheis was eligible to vote.
As to the ballot of the unidentified voter on which a circle was
made around the box in which the cross was marked, we do not
construe such marking to be of such a character as to mar or
deface the ballot.5
Accordingly, we overrule the Intervenor's exceptions to the
Regional Director's report on challenged ballots. As the
Petitioner received a majority of the valid ballots cast, we will
certify it as the representative of the employees in the following
unit as set forth in the consent-election agreement:
All employees in the Employer's plant, including plant
clerical employees, and excluding office clerical em-'
ployees, professional employees , plant guards , and super-
visors as defined in the Act.
[The Board certified United Paperworkers of America, CIO,
as the designated collective -bargaining representative of the
employees of the above-named Employer, in the unit herein-
above set forth.]
5 N. L R. B. v. Whitinsville Spinning Ring Company, 199 F 2d 585 (C. A. 1).
SYLVANIA ELECTRIC PRODUCTS, INC. and INTERNATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, AFL, Petitioner and LO-
CAL 614, INTERNATIONAL UNION OF ELECTRICAL,
RADIO AND MACHINE WORKERS, CIO. Case No. 4-RC-
1848. September 29, 1953
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF
REPRESENTATIVE
Pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election' issued by
the Board herein on March 24, 1953, an election by secret
ballot was conducted on April 9, 1953, under the direction and
supervision of the Regional Director for the Fourth Region.
Upon completion of the election, the parties were furnished with
a tally of ballots, which showed that out of approximately 274
eligible voters, 263 cast ballots, of which 137 were for the
International Association of Machinists, AFL, hereinafter
called the IAM; 109 were for Local 614, International Union of
Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers, CIO, hereinafter
called the IUE-CIO; and 15 were against the participating labor
1103 NLRB 989.
106 NLRB No. 196.
SYLVANIA ELECTRIC PRODUCTS, INC. 1211
organizations . There were 2 challenged ballots and 2 void
ballots.
Thereafter, on April 14, 1953, the IUE-CIO filed timely
objections to the election . It asserted that certain activity of
the Employer, more fully set forth below, prevented a free
choice of representatives by the employees, and requestedthat
the election be set aside. In accordance with the Board's Rules
and Regulations , the Regional Director investigated the IUE-
CIO's objection and on June 19, 1953, issued and served on the
parties his report and recommendations on objections , in which
he found the objections to be without merit and recommended
that they be overruled. On July 10, 1953, the IUE-CIO filed
exceptions to the Regional Director' s report and a memorandum
in support of its exceptions , and on the same date the Employer
filed its brief in support of the Regional Director' s report.
As the basis for its objections , the IUE-CIO alleged that (1)
the Employer coerced and intimidated its employees byletters
and a radio broadcast in which it stated that there would be a
strike and loss of employment if the IUE-CIO won; (2) the
Employer thereby lent aid and assistance to the IAM and re-
vealed its willingness to deal with the IAM in preference to the
IUE-CIO; and (3) the Employer by certain acts and statements
of its supervisors during the election campaign gave improper
preference to the IAM over the IUE-CIO.
With respect to the first objection , the Regional Director
found that in the letters sent and the broadcast made by Plant
Manager Brady, there "is an absence of threats or promise,
and the assertions are confined to predictions of what the
Employer felt would be the possible consequences" of the
selection of the IUE-CIO and was therefore privileged by
Section 8 (c) of the Act. We agree. A close study of the language
used in both the letters and the radio broadcast shows that
neither constituted a threat of reprisal or promise of benefit,
but rather was in the nature of an opinion as to the possible
consequences which might flow from the selection of the IUE-
CIO as bargaining representative . The Board has held that the
views expressed in such statements fall within the protective
ambit of Section 8 (c) of the Act.2
With respect to the second objection that the Employer by
such statements implied that it preferred to deal with the IAM,
the Regional Director found, and we agree, that the letters and
broadcast contained permissible statements in their relation-
ship to the election . The Board has held that an Employer
does not improperly interfere with an election by expressing a
preference for 1 of 2 competing unions , and accompanying
his statement with reasons , where, as here, the reasons them-
selves are not improperly or coercively set forth.'
2 Triangle Conduit & Cable Co., Inc., 100 NLRB No. 249; Standard Oil Company, 90 NLRB
1465.
3Stewart- Warner Corporation, 102 NLRB 1153.
1212 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The IUE-CIO's final objection was that the Employer through
its supervisors gave improper aid and support to the IAM over
the IUE-CIO. The Regional Director found that the IUE-CIO's
protests present matters occurring prior to the date of the
issuance of the notice of hearing and cannot be regarded as
conduct having a bearing on the results of the election. The
IUE-CIO in its memorandum in support of its exceptions to the
Regional Director's report describes an incident which it
alleges occurred after the notice of hearing, in which a super-
visor told an employee who was applying for a promotion: "I
understand that you have changed your mind about the company
and that you are now in favor of the IUE-CIO." This incident
occurred almost 4 months before the election. Without deciding
whether this statement was coercive, we do not regard such an
isolated statement, made at a time so remote from the election,
sufficient to warrant setting aside the election.4
Accordingly, we shall adopt the recommendations of the
Regional Director and overrule the objection to the election by
the IUE-CIO. As a majority of the employees have selected the
IAM as their bargaining representative, we shall certify it in
accordance with the tally of ballots.
[The Board certified International Association of Machinists,
AFL, as the designated collective-bargaining representative
of the employees of Sylvania Electric Products, Inc., Williams-
port, Pennslyvania, in the appropriate unit, as described in the
Decision and Direction of Election.]
4Calvine Cotton Mills, Inc., 98 NLRB 843; S & S Corrugated Paper Machinery Co., Inc., 89
NLRB 1363.
GULF STATES ASPHALT COMPANY and GENERAL DRIVERS
WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS, LOCAL 968, Petitioner.
Case No. 39-RC-627. September 29, 1953
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF
REPRESENTATIVES
On July 30 and 31, 1953, pursuant to a Decision and Direction
of Election' issued by the Board on July 16, 1953, an election
by secret ballot was conducted under the direction and super-
vision of the Regional Director for the Sixteenth Region, among
the employees of the Employer in the unit found appropriate in
the Decision. Upon completion of the election, atally of ballots
was issued and duly served by the Regional Director upon the
parties concerned. The tally reveals that there were approxi-
mately 45 eligible voters and that 44 ballots were cast, of which
1Not reported in printed volumes of Board decisions.
106 NLRB No. 195.