Lift Truck Sales and Services, Inc., (2016)

Docket Number:14-RD-153982

NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the bound volumes of NLRB decisions. Readers are requested to notify the Executive Secretary, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C. 20570, of any typographical or other formal errors so that corrections can be included in the bound volumes.

Lift Truck Sales and Services, Inc. and William Hubbard, Petitioner and Building Materials, Excavating, Heavy Haulers, Drivers, Warehousemen and Helpers, Local Union No. 541, affiliated with International Brotherhood of Teamsters. Case 14–RD–153982

July 12, 2016



The issue presented in this case is whether an incumbent union’s representative status may be challenged within 6 months of the employer’s having entered into an informal Board settlement agreement admitting that it had engaged in bad-faith bargaining. Guided by Lee Lumber & Building Material Corp., 334 NLRB 399 (2001) (Lee Lumber II), enfd. 310 F.3d 209 (D.C. Cir. 2002), we reverse the Regional Director and find that he should not have directed an election in these circumstances.

On June 25, 2015,1 the Regional Director for Region 14 issued a Decision and Direction of Election in the instant decertification proceeding. Applying Poole Foundry & Machine Co., 95 NLRB 34 (1951), enfd. 192

F.2d 740 (4th Cir. 1951), cert. denied 342 U.S. 954 (1952), the Regional Director found that the petition was filed after a reasonable period of time for bargaining had elapsed following the parties’ postsettlement resumption of bargaining. The Regional Director therefore directed an election. Thereafter, in accordance with Section 102.67 of the National Labor Relations Board’s Rules and Regulations, the Union filed a timely request for review. In it, the Union contended that the 6-month minimum period for bargaining set forth in Lee Lumber II is applicable in this case. On December 2, the Board granted the Union’s request for review. The Union filed a brief on review.

The National Labor Relations Board has delegated its authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.

  1. FACTS

    The Employer operates a material handling and aerial lift equipment sales, service, and rental business from its facility in Kansas City, Missouri. The Union has represented the Employer’s mechanics, parts, and utility em

    1 All dates are in 2015 unless otherwise indicated.

    ployees for approximately 40 years. The parties’ most recent collective-bargaining agreement expired on May 31, 2014.

    On September 25, 2014, employee William Hubbard filed a petition in Case 14–RD–137434, seeking to decertify the Union as the employee representative. On December 17, 2014, the General Counsel issued a complaint alleging that the Employer, “[b]y its overall conduct . . . had failed and refused to bargain in good faith with the Union as the exclusive collective-bargaining representative of the Unit,” in violation of Section 8(a)(1) and (5) of the...

To continue reading