EDM of Texas, Div. of Chromalloy American Corp., 934 (1979)

Extract

---

EDM of Texas, Div. of Chromalloy American Corp., 934 (1979)

DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

EDM of Texas, Div. of Chromalloy American Corp.

and International Union of Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers, AFL-CIO-CLC. Cases 16-CA8182 and 16-RC-7806

September 28, 1979

DECISION, ORDER, AND DIRECTION OF SECOND ELECTION

BY CHAIRMAN FANNING AND MEMBERS PENELLO

AND TRUESDALE

On July 17, 1979, Administrative Law Judge William J. Pannier III issued the attached Decision in this proceeding. Thereafter, Respondent filed exceptions and a supporting brief, and the Charging Party filed a brief in opposition to Respondent's exceptions.

Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations Board has delegated its authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.

The Board has considered the record and the attached Decision in light of the exceptions and briefs and has decided to affirm the rulings, findings,' and conclusions of the Administrative Law Judge and to adopt his recommended Order.

Respondent has excepted to certain credibility findings made by the Administrative Law Judge. It is the Board's established policy not to overrule an administrative law judge's resolutions with respect to credibility unless the clear preponderance of all of the relevant evidence convinces us that the resolutions are incorrect. StandardDry Wall Products, Inc., 91 NLRB 544 (1950), enfd. 188 F.2d 362 (3d Cir. 1951). We have carefully examined the record and find no basis for reversing his findings in the course of determining that Respondent substantially failed to comply with the requirements of Excelsior Underwear Inc., 156 NLRB 1236 (1966), the Administrative Law Judge stated that incorrect addresses and omissions from the Excelsior list were of equal significance. The Board's position, however, isthat omissions are more serious than inaccurate addresses. The Lobster House, 186 NLRB 148 (1970). Based on the omissions alone, we find that Respondent failed to comply substantially with Excelsior.

Further, the Administrative Law Judge erred in computing the percentages of omissions and incorrect addresses. To reach the figure on omissions, the Administrative Law Judge incorrectly based his computations on the number of eligible voters disclosed by the tally of ballots rather than on the number of employees on the Excelsior list, plus the number of omissions. See Texas ClristianUniversity, 220 NLRB 396, 397. fn. 7(1975). Here. the number of names on the Excelsior list supplied by the Employer was 142. However, eight individuals having terminated their employment prior to the date on which the list was complied, the list should have contained 134 names.

Since 16 names were omitted from the list, the corrected number on the list itself, plus those omissions, was 150. The percentage of omissions was...

See the full content of this document

---