The Emerson Electric Manufacturing Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsMay 27, 1953

105 N.L.R.B. 26 (N.L.R.B. 1953)

26 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD barges , boatswains, guards, professional employees, and supervisors as defined in the Act. (3) All unlicensed personnel on board all vessels owned and/or operated by Employer Inland, excluding licensed officers , stewards , boatswains , guards , professional em- ployees , and supervisors as defined in the Act. [Text of Order amending Direction of Elections ' and Second Direction of Election omitted from publication.] By direction of the Board: Ogden W . Fields, Associate Executive Secretary. 2 The amendments made with respect to Employer Inland are for record purposes only since an election has been conducted among the employees of Employer Inland and a cer- tification of representatives issued by the Regional Director on November 19, 1952. THE EMERSON ELECTRIC MANUFACTURING COMPANY and INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, LOCAL NO. 1, AFL, Petitioner . Case No. 14- RC-1969 . May 27, 1953 SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES On March 13, 1953 , pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election dated February 19, 1953 , but not reported in printed volumes of Board decisions, an election by secret ballot was conducted under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Fourteenth Region among the employees of the Employer in the unit found appropriate by the Board. Following the election , a tally of ballots was furnished to the parties. The tally showed that of 51 valid votes counted , 27 were for the Petitioner , Z4 for the Intervenor , and none was challenged. Both the Employer and the Intervenor filed objections to the elec- tion. On April 3 the Regional Director filed his report on objec- tions finding that the Employer ' s objections were untimely because received 7 minutes after the official close of business at the Regional Office on March 20, the last day for filing ob- jections , but that if timely, they were in the nature of postelec- tion challenges and therefore raised no substantial issue. The Intervenor 's objections he found untimely because not received until March 23, 1953 . Both the Employer and the Intervenor duly filed exceptions to this report with the Board . After due consideration , the Board issued its Order of April 22 directing 105 NLRB No. 42. THE EMERSON ELECTRIC MANUFACTURING COMPANY 27 the Regional Director to prepare a supplemental report on objections with reference to the Intervenor ' s contention that its objections were timely filed because it had been advised by the then Acting Regional Director that they would be acceptable if postmarked on March 20, 1953 , including an investigation and recommendations on the merits of the Intervenor ' s objections if such advice had been given. On May 8 , 1953, the Regional Director filedhis supplemental report on objections finding that no such advice had been given the Intervenor . No exceptions having been filed to the supple- mental report , the Board hereby adopts the Regional Director's recommendation that the Intervenor ' s objections be overruled because untimely filed. As to the Employer ' s objections , we do not adopt the Regional Director ' s finding that they were untimely inasmuch as the Regional Office was actually still open for business when they were presented at 4:37 p . m. on March 20 , 1953 . Apparently the attorney for the Petitioner was at the very time in the Regional Office discussing the case with one of the field examiners . In our opinion Section 102 . 83 of the Board ' s Rules and Regulations concerning timely filing has been satisfied. We do , however , adopt the Regional Director ' s finding con- cerning the postelection nature of the 3 challenges which form the basis of the Employer ' s objections . The Employer's per- sonnel manager , after the polls were closed , waived its challenge to the supervisory character of 3 employees , and the Board agent conducting the election thereupon opened the 3 ballots and commingled them with those of other employees before counting them. The Employer alleges that the waiver was under protest , without offering proof to that effect. To allow the Employer to reverse its position concerning these ballots after the count has beencompleted--asitattempts to do through the medium of its objections --would violate the Board's consistent policy declining to permit postelection challenges. See Halliburton Portland Cement Company , 92 NLRB 1552. Accordingly , we find no merit in the Employer ' s objections and they are hereby overruled. As the tally of ballots shows that the Petitioner has received a majority of the valid votes cast , we shall certify it as the bargaining representative of the employees in the unit heretofore found appropriate. [The Board certified International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers , Local No. 1, AFL, as the designated collective-bar- gaining representatives of employees of The Emerson Electric Manufacturing Company in the unit found to be appropriate.], Chairman Herzog and Member Peterson took no part in the consideration of the above Decision and Certification of Repre- sentatives.