TWENTY-SIXTH ANNUAL REPORT - National Labor Relations Board

206 Twenty-sixth Annual Report of the National Labor Relations Board
(2) Necessity for Filing of Election Petition
In Goldleaf 84 the union contended that it was picketing to compel
ecognition for a single employee of the employer and that, since it
is established Board policy not to conduct an election in a one-man
unit, it would have been futile to file a petition for an election This
being so, the union argued, it was relieved of the necessity of filing
a petition under subsection (C) Fmding no exception in the subsection
for the omission to file an election petition in such circumstances,
the court enjoined the picketing m Inch had continued for more than
30 days °5
(3) Accretion to the Bargaining Unit as a Defense to Picketing
In Best Markets °° the union, which had picketed for more than
30 days without filing an election petition, claimed that it was picketing
to compel the employer to blanket the employees of stores acquired
from another chain into its bargaining unit under the terms of its
contract with the employer and, theiefore, that its picketing was
not for an object prohibited by the section The court, however,
found that the new stores, where another union nos recognized as
bargaining agent, continued after their acquisition to be operated as
a separate division under their former name, with no inter change
of employees with the stores within respondent's bargaining unit, and
that under Boaid cases they might be a separate appropriate unit
for bargaining purposes Concluding that the unit issue raised
"interesting legal questions" whicli "should be disposed of by the
Board, rather than by the court," and that under Boaid procedures
neither iespondeas contract nor the contract of the union at the acquired
stores foreclosed the filing of an election petition, the court
found reasonable cause to believe that the union's picketing was for
recognition as bargaining representative at the acquired stores, citing
cases,° 7 and enjoined the picketmg
(4) Publicity Proviso
In some of the injunction cases during the fiscal year unions have
claimed that their picketing was exempted from the proscription
of section 8(b) (7) (C) by the second proviso (above, p 205), which
permits picketing for the purpose of advising the public that the
'McLeod v Local 456, Teamsters & Chauffeurs Union, IBT (Geddles/ Sales Corp ), 47
MIMI 2692 (DC SNY)
95 Subsequently the Board proceeding was terminated by entry of an order by the Board
upon the union's failure to file exception to the trial examiner's intermediate repo' t finding
a violation of the act Goldleaf Sales Corp, Case No 2—CP-81
I" Schou/71er v Local 1357, Retail Clerks International Assn (Best MarLete, lac), 48
LERM 2610 (DC E Pa)
99 111g , McLeod v National Mai ',time Unson (Motile-McCormack Linea, Inc) 157 F
Supp 691 (DC SNY)