Wright Brothers Paper Box Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 28, 1982

261 N.L.R.B. 1162 (N.L.R.B. 1982)

DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Wright Brothers Paper Box Co., Inc. and District
10, International Association of Machinists and
Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO, Petitioner.
Case 30-RC-4012
May 28, 1982
DECISION AND DIRECTION
BY CHAIRMAN VAN DE WATER AND
MEMBERS FANNING AND ZIMMERMAN
Pursuant to authority granted it by the National
Labor Relations Board under Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a three-
member panel has considered determinative chal-
lenges and objections in an election held August
14, 1981,' and the Hearing Officer's report recom-
mending disposition of same. The Board has re-
viewed the record in light of the exceptions and
brief and hereby adopts the Hearing Officer's find-
ings2 and recommendations 3 only to the extent
consistent herewith.
The Petitioner excepted to the Hearing Officer's
finding that a statement by a union representative
constituted objectionable conduct which warranted
setting aside the election and directing a new elec-
tion. We find merit in that exception. The credited
testimony is that, 3 weeks prior to the election, a
union representative stated at a meeting of employ-
ees that initiation fees would not be required until a
"new union" was formed. It is sufficiently clear
that, under the Union's offer, employees have the
opportunity to join the Union after the election
without paying an initiation fee. In circumstances
such as here, a "new union" is not created at the
moment the election occurs, but at a later date.
The International and newly represented employ-
ees must first determine whether to form a new
local or merge the new unit into an existing local,
' The election was conducted pursuant to a Stipulation for Certifica-
tion Upon Consent Election. The tally was: 35 for, and 32 against, the
Petitioner. The ballots of four voters were challenged.
2 The Employer and the Petitioner have excepted to certain credibility
resolutions made by the Hearing Officer It is the Board's established
policy not to overrule a hearing officer's resolutions of credibility unless
the clear preponderance of all of the relevant evidence convinces us that
the resolutions are incorrect. The Coca-Cola Bottling Company of Mem-
phis, 132 NLRB 481, 483 (1961). We have carefully examined the record
and find no basis for reversing his findings.
3 The Employer excepted to the Hearing Officer's recommendation
that the presence of Ernest Anderson in the polling place during voting
was not a basis for setting aside the election results We adopt the Hear-
ing Officer's recommendation. In the absence of exceptions thereto, we
adopt, pro forma, the Hearing Officer's recommendations to overrule the
challenges to the ballots of Richard Sell and Thomas Streeter, and to sus-
tain the challenge to the ballot of Lisa Lauters.
and then must implement that decision by comply-
ing with the procedures under the International's
constitution. Thus, under the Union's statement
here, in order to avoid the initiation fees employees
need only join by a time which is after the election
date. The statement is therefore not objectionable
under N.L.R.B. v. Savair Manufacturing Company,
414 U.S. 270 (1973), and the election results will
not be set aside.4
The Employer excepted to the Hearing Officer's
recommendation that the challenge to Edmund
Kraus' ballot be sustained. We find merit in that ex-
ception. In concluding that Kraus did not share a
community of interest with the production and
maintenance employees, the Hearing Officer relied
on three factors: Kraus' salary was much higher
than any production employee; even though some
mechanics earn roughly what Kraus makes, there is
no evidence that he is a qualified mechanic or
spends much time repairing machines; and Kraus'
working conditions differ from unit employees, in
that he is salaried, does not punch a timeclock,
works different hours, and has a private extension
phone. However, based on the record before us,
we cannot agree with the Hearing Officer's ulti-
mate conclusion. The evidence demonstrates that
Kraus' earnings are not greater than all mainte-
nance employees. Kraus spends approximately 20
hours per week on the production floor performing
work normally performed by mechanics, and
Kraus' usual work hours of 7:30-5 p.m. are not sig-
nificantly different from the unit employees'
normal work hours, excluding overtime, of 7:30-4
p.m. The fact that he is salaried, does not punch a
timeclock, and has a private extension phone does
not, without more, establish an absence of commu-
nity of interest, (Container Research Corporation,
188 NLRB 586 (1971); Risdon Manufacturing Com-
pany Inc., 195 NLRB 579 (1972)), nor does the fact
that he may act as a foreman occasionally. We
therefore will include Kraus' ballot in the voting
tally.
4 The Hearing Officer relied on Inland Shoe Manufacturing Co., Inc.,
211 NLRB 724 (1974); The Coleman Company, Inc., 212 NLRB 927
(1974); and California State Automobile Association, 214 NLRB 223 (1974),
in his report Each of those cases involved a statement that initiation fees
would not be charged to "charter members." In this case the Union of-
fered to waive initiation fees for those who joined by the time a "new
union" was formed; there was no reference here to "charter members."
We thus find that the statement made here, unlike those made in Inland
Shoe, Coleman, and California State, is not ambiguous and does not vio-
late the Savair standard. In any event, Member Fanning would adhere to
his dissent in The Coleman Company. Inc., 212 NLRB 927
261 NLRB No. 172
1162
WRIGHT BROTHERS PAPER BOX INC.
DIRECTION
It is hereby directed that the Regional Director
for Region 30 shall, within 10 days from the date
of this Decision and Direction, open and count the
ballots of Richard Sell, Thomas Streeter, and
Edmund Kraus. Thereafter, the Regional Director
for Region 30 shall prepare and cause to be served
on the parties a revised tally of the ballots, includ-
ing therein the count of such ballots, upon the basis
of which he shall issue the appropriate certifica-
tion.
1163