Extract
Gary Aircraft Corp., 108 (1971)
Gary Aircraft Corporation and International Union,
United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW). Cases 23-CA-3672, 23-CA-3702, 23-CA-3733, 23-CA-3733-2, 23-CA-3733-3, 23-CA-3733-4, and 23-RC-3440September 14, 1971DECISION, ORDER, AND DIRECTION BY MEMBERS FANNING, JENKINS, AND KENNEDYOn March 24, 1971, Trial Examiner Marion C.Ladwig issued his Decision in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, and recommending that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the attached Trial Examiner's Decision. The Trial Examiner further recommended that the challenged ballots cast by 20 employees in Case 23-RC-3440 be opened and counted and that, thereafter, in the event the Union has not received a majority of the ballots cast, the election be set aside and a new election be held. The Respondent filed exceptions to the Trial Examiner's Decision and a brief in support thereof.Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations Board has delegated its powers in connection with these cases to a threemember panel.The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner made at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the Trial Examiner's Decision, the exceptions and briefs, and the entire record in these cases and hereby adopts the findings,' conclusions,2 and recommendations3 of the Trial Examiner.ORDER AND DIRECTIONPursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations Board adopts as its Order the recommended Order of the Trial Examiner and hereby orders that Gary Aircraft Corporation, San Antonio, Texas, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall take the action set forth in the Trial Examiner's recommended Order.It is hereby directed that as part of his investigation to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining with the Employer, the Regional Director for Region 23 shall, pursuant to the Board's Rules and Regulations, Series 8, as amended, within 10 days from the date of this Direction, open and count the ballots of Eliseo Casanova, James Dodson,Jesse Dominguez, James Fields, William Gentry,Ramon Gonzalez, Willis Hensley, Calvin Lissner,Angel Lopez, Seratin Lopez, Othon Martinez, Robert Mayen, Pedro Perez, Philip Persyn, Manuel Puente,Tomas Sanchez, Victorino Sanchez, Eladio Trevino,Paul Tudyk, and Benito Zuniga and thereafter prepare and cause to be served on the parties a revised tally of ballots, including therein the count of said ballots. If the Petitioner receives a majority of the valid ballots cast, according to the revised tally, the Regional Director shall certify it as the exclusive bargaining representative of the employees in the appropriate unit. If the Petitioner does not receive a majority, the following shall become applicable.IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the election conducted in Case 23-RC-3440 on July 10, 1970, be, and it hereby is, set aside, and that said case be, and it hereby is, remanded to the Regional Director for Region 23 to conduct a new election when he deems the circumstances permit a free choice of a bargaining representative.i In the first sentence of the sixth paragraph of section 11, A, of his Decision, the Trial Examiner inadvertently referred to July 18 rather than July 10 as the day on which employees Morales and Otero met Personnel Manager Gomez on his way to the preelection conference This inadvertence is hereby corrected 2 The Respondent has excepted to certain credibility findings alleging that the Trial Examiner was biased and prejudiced It is the Board's established policy not to overrule a Trial Examiner's resolutions with respect to credibility unless a clear preponderance of all the relevant evidence convinces us that the resolutions were incorrect Standard Dry Wall Products, Inc, 91 NLRB 544, enfd 188 F 2d 363 (C A 3) We have carefully examined the record and find no basis for reversing his findings and reject the charge of bias and prejudice 3 There are no exceptions to the Trial Examiner's findings with respect to the challenged ballots of James Dodson, Angel Lopez , Pedro Perez,Philip Persyn, Manuel Puente, Seratin Lopez, Robert Mayen, Eladio Trevino, Gregorio Torres, Eugene Mireles, Paul Mireles, Robert Pauley,James Fields, Willis Hensley, Calvin Lissner, Tomas Sanchez, Paul Tudyk,Eliseo Casanova, William Gentry, Othon Martinez, Victorino Sanchez,Jesse Dominguez, Ramon Gonzalez, and Benito Zuniga that Union's Objections 4, 5, and 6, as designated by the Trial Examiner in his Decision, be overruled, or that the Employer's Objections 2 and 3 be overruled. In the absence of exceptions ...See the full content of this document
Sponsored links
