Westinghouse Electric Corporation, Employer And United Electrical, Radio And Machine Workers Of America (ue),, Petitioner, 955 (1950)

In the Matter of WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION, EMPLOYER and UNITED ELECTRICAL, RADIO AND MACHINE WORKERS OF AMERICA (UE),, PETITIONER Case No. 6-RC-474.-Decided October 16, 1950 DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES Pursuant to a Stipulation for Certification upon Consent Election, an election by secret ballot was held on February 3, 1950, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Sixth Region. Upon the conclusion of the election, a tally of ballots was furnished the parties in accordance with the rules and regulations of the Board. The tally reflected that, of approximately 1,088 eligible voters, 1,068 cast valid ballots, of which 509 were for the Petitioner, 545 were for the Intervenor,' 12 were against the participating labor organizations, and 2 were challenged.

Thereafter the Petitioner filed 12 separate objections to the conduct of the election, and to conduct affecting the results of the election. In accordance with the Board's Rules and Regulations, the Regional Director investigated the matters raised by the objections and issued and duly served upon the parties his report on objections, in which he found that objections 1, 4, 8, and 9 raised substantial and material issues with respect to the election, and recommended that the Board direct a hearing thereon. He also found that the remaining objections were without merit and recommended that they be overruled. The Petitioner, the Intervenor, and the Employer filed exceptions to the report on objections and supporting briefs.

Thereafter, the Board 2 ordered that a hearing be held before a hearing officer with respect to certain aspects of objections 1, 4, 8, and 9 and that the hearing officer prepare and cause to be served on the parties a report containing resolutions of the credibility of witnesses, findings of fact, conclusions, and recommendations. Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held before Gerald P. Leicht, hearing officer, who thereafter issued and duly served upon the parties his report on objections to election, a copy of which is attached hereto, in which International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL, Local 201.

2 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 Herzog and Memubers Houston and Styles].

91 NLRB No. 150. 955 he recommended that the Petitioner's objections be overruled, and that the Intervenor be certified. Thereafter, the Petitioner filed exceptions to the hearing officer's report and a supporting brief and the Employer and the Intervenor filed briefs.

The Board has reviewed the rulings of the hearing officer and finds that no prejudicial error was committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the Petitioner's objections, the reports of the Regional Director and the hearing officer,3 the exceptions and briefs, and the entire record in the case, and hereby overrules the Petitioner's objections, for the following reasons:

Objection 1. The Petitioner alleges in substance that supervisors of the Employer engaged in acts of interference and coercion in favor of the Intervenor and against the Petitioner. The Regional Director found that the alleged acts of interference and coercion, which consisted of statements allegedly made by various supervisors, if made, were noncoercive expressions of opinion and did not interfere with the election. The Petitioner has excepted to this finding.

We agree with the Regional Director that the statements attributed to supervisors were noncoercive expressions of opinion, which did not interfere with the election,4 particularly when viewed in the light of the Employer's neutrality statement of January 30, 1950.5 Accordingly, we find this objection to be without merit.

Objection 2. The Petitioner alleges in substance that the Employer and the Intervenor influenced and coerced a local ministerial association to campaign for the Intervenor and against the Petitioner. The Regional Director found that representatives of the Employer and the Intervenor 6 met with members of the association to discuss the 3 The Petitioner excepts to the hearing officer's failure to make findings resolving the credibility of witnesses, as directed by the Board in its order directing the hearing in this matter. The record reveals that, in most instances, there is no substantial conflict in the testimony of the witnesses. Where such conflicts exist we have, for the purposes of this Decision, accepted as most credible the testimony which supports the contentions of the Petitioner. Accordingly, we find this exception to be without merit.

4 For example, Foreman Nunamker's statement to an emplo...

If you are already a vLex customer, Access Here