Sharondale Corporation, 1238 (1982)
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Sharondale Corporation and United Mine Workers of America, Petitioner. Case 9-RC-13836
July 23, 1982 DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF
BY CHAIRMAN VAN DE WATER AND
MEMBERS FANNING AND JENKINS
Pursuant to authority granted it by the National Labor Relations Board under Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a threemember panel has considered challenges to an election held on September 9, 1981,1 and the Hearing Officer's report recommending disposition of the same.2
The Board has reviewed the Hearing Officer's report in light of the exceptions and supporting briefs filed by the Employer and the Petitioner as well as the answering briefs of both parties to exceptions of the other, and hereby adopts the Hearing Officer's recommendations except as modified herein.
In his report and recommendations on challenged ballots, the Hearing Officer concluded that Jeffrey Rutherford was a supervisor within the meaning of Section 2(11) and recommended that the challenge to his ballot be sustained. We do not agree.
Jeffrey Rutherford, an electrician, was assigned to work on the third shift as foreman. He received 2 additional hours' pay but received the same shift premium, insurance benefits, holiday pay, and vacation as other employees. Finding that, as foreman,
Rutherford assigned work to employees, initialed and approved timecards, decided when to work overtime, performed similar duties as other supervisory foremen, and exercised independent judgment in performing his functions, the Hearing Officer ' The election was conducted pursuant to a Stipulation for Certification Upon Consent Election. The tally of ballots showed that, of approximately 120 eligible voters, 118 ballots were cast, of which 58 were for, and 52 were against, the Petitioner. There were eight challenged ballots, a sufficient number to affect the results of the election.
I The hearing was conducted pursuant to a Report on Challenged Ballots, Order Directing Hearing and Notice of Hearing issued by the Acting Regional Director on October 16, 1981, and adopted by the Board on November 9, 1981. In the report, the Acting Regional Director sustained the challenge to the ballot of Ermel Akers; overruled the challenge to the ballot of David Blankenship, the opening and counting of which he recommended be held in abeyance pending the resolution of the challenged ballots which were the subject of the hearing; recommended...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP