Kay Manufacturing Corp., 1077 (1958)

agents are not, and have not been lawfully entitled to force or require W E Wells and Sybil R Wells, partners, doing business as Tye & Wells, Contractors, to assign the disputed work to their members rather than to Tye & Wells' own employees who are not members of the respondent labor organizations 2 Within ten (10) days from the date of this Decison and Determination of Dispute, the Respondents shall notify the Regional Director for the Ninth Region in writing whether or not they accept the Board's determination of this dispute, and whether or not they will refrain from forcing,or requiring W E Wells and, Sybil R Wells, partners, doing business as Tye & Wells, Contractors, by means proscribed by Section 8 (b) (4) (D) to assign the work in dispute to their members rather than to employees assigned to that work by Tye & Wells, Contractors, who are not members of the Respondent Unions Kay Manufacturing Corporation and United Furniture Workers of America, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case No 11-PC-1124 September 99, 1958 DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES

Pursuant to a stipulation for certification upon consent election, executed by the parties on May 28, 1958, an election by secret ballot was conducted on June 12, 1958, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Eleventh Region among the employees in the unit described in the stipulation At the conclusion of the election, the parties were furnished a tally of ballots which showed that of approximately 121 eligible voters, 111 cast ballots, of which 57 were for and 54 were against, the Petitioner On June 19, 1958, the Employer filed timely objections to the conduct affecting the results of the election On July 17, 1958, following an investigation, the Regional Director issued and duly served upon the parties his report on objections, in which he found no merit in the Employer's objections and recommended that the objections be overruled The Employer filed timely exceptions to the Regional Director's recommendations Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a threemember panel [Members Rodgers, Bean, and Jenkins] The Board has considered the Regional Director's report, the exceptions, and the entire record in this case, and finds 1 The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act 121 NLRB No 138

1078 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, 2. The labor organization involved claims to represent employees of the Employer.

3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representation of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section (2) (6) and (7) of the Act.

4. The following employees of the Employer constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act :

   All production and maintenance employees employed by the Employer at its High Point, North Carolina, plant, excluding office clerical employees, watchmen, guards, professional employees, and all supervisors as defined in the Act.

5. The Employer's objections to the conduct affecting the results of the election, and its exceptions, are lacking in merit.

   The Employer filed three objections to the conduct of the election as follows :

   (1) The Petitioner and...